From: Thomas Zander <thomas@thomaszander.se>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 19:42:53 +0200
Message-ID: <4330019.CpFTjXpmfm@coldstorage>
User-Agent: KMail/4.14.1 (Linux/3.16.0-4-amd64; KDE/4.14.2; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <1689926.ZjkxyJjokn@coldstorage>
References: <1B7F00D3-41AE-44BF-818D-EC4EF279DC11@gmail.com>
	<CABaSBaxyQja9bqDsyfWubR1R-Xf2tqmSmU-GW_z7VQTxbBagrQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1689926.ZjkxyJjokn@coldstorage>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Why Satoshi's temporary anti-spam measure
	isn'ttemporary
Precedence: list

On Thursday 30. July 2015 18.07.40 Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Remember when we went from single-core CPUs to multi-core (and 
> hyperthreading)? Developers were saying it was useless because all apps
> were  still single-threaded.  And now, 15 years later, there are fantastic
> frameworks to make this easy.
> 
> Same will happen with distributed. Any assumption you wrote above is not 
> inherent in the technology.

My brain went a bit to fast (dinner was being served, she made me close the 
laptop...) and wrote distributed above while the topic is decentralized.
Its not entirely wrong, even; Libraries or approaches that do distributed will 
be useful for decentralized systems.  ;)

-- 
Thomas Zander