Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <grarpamp@gmail.com>) id 1Sue2Z-0006S6-Ih for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 27 Jul 2012 06:28:47 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 74.125.82.175 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.175; envelope-from=grarpamp@gmail.com; helo=mail-we0-f175.google.com; Received: from mail-we0-f175.google.com ([74.125.82.175]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Sue2Y-0005Sx-IF for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 27 Jul 2012 06:28:47 +0000 Received: by weyr6 with SMTP id r6so1950938wey.34 for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 23:28:40 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.5.213 with SMTP id 63mr695274wel.20.1343370520299; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 23:28:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.180.78.131 with HTTP; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 23:28:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201207270604.01966.luke@dashjr.org> References: <CAD2Ti29dqCYoOMcX0zcOQnpLGCxnCjYHHqMzyyq+hvcVQ2c7nQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAAS2fgQmQ6f1_025QgJsG4aEyH4yHwk-2aWUUY+2FPs7-Tpvvg@mail.gmail.com> <CAD2Ti29LR+9=uO+LnrcsTYGSFW9S1FWuCLtoU-KwKkNmiVrnGQ@mail.gmail.com> <201207270604.01966.luke@dashjr.org> Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 02:28:40 -0400 Message-ID: <CAD2Ti29ruBpNc6ugvYh+e5msiKZtJoe+jsyZ5GYci86t8_Hykw@mail.gmail.com> From: grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com> To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (grarpamp[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1Sue2Y-0005Sx-IF Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Scalability issues X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development> List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 06:28:47 -0000 > shopping. Good thing I can still spend, even with an incomplete blockchain :) > but why do you also need to encrypt 2+ GB of public record? 1) I'm not seeing an option to split the wallet, debug log and other privates pathwise from the blockchain. 2) Because encrypt everything is reasonable standard practice. https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Cardinal_Richelieu [ref: disputed quote] BTW, logs for this box say at least 9 days were spent attempting to crunch the most recent 3100 blocks before it was overrun with new ones and retired. (There's no formal start timestamp, just some entries...)