Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 77563484 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 22:25:55 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-pa0-f47.google.com (mail-pa0-f47.google.com [209.85.220.47]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 13E54143 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 22:25:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by padck2 with SMTP id ck2so76364821pad.0 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 15:25:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:subject:date:message-id:to:mime-version; bh=QR2uSjtRfDLeNPXdACl1qVAkwFGyH/Zdsrl+ztwygQw=; b=xoq+JfWSKyFbRvKQ3Kf4KGN0E9eX32YQ9TL8LKdxkg//gcsy2VBGB5zKynNVszd209 HgDWKPxcOnFqBfMCUrdtq+XF2q3YG1/zXOuuyd2ZRwOA1O42LbHi6MkVfvkzf9T7eQ8Z i8K90vae/RZ08SL3vYowYdlavJlvMLoY1GLbjAT8iGosL2WN0eEW50KGd0qeUAFHWtmW nuavmbCg+5ZbNKv0KO0/W0KEBkV+GGmk0Q4EVUajdPELarou7ZCmoxQg88CiAqEEMvUO HzjLC1tNk2qfp0iWqgK7fq7JUpm0qTKfKMjAwu7B0sIoqwny0Jodm5QMDvzx7DgPKtua IeRA== X-Received: by 10.66.230.201 with SMTP id ta9mr86190783pac.95.1438122353854; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 15:25:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.107] (cpe-76-167-237-202.san.res.rr.com. [76.167.237.202]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y6sm31727554pdl.61.2015.07.28.15.25.51 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 28 Jul 2015 15:25:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Eric Lombrozo X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.5 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_01863E7F-FA27-4C93-83ED-6CBCEC916FBD"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 15:25:50 -0700 Message-Id: <1B7F00D3-41AE-44BF-818D-EC4EF279DC11@gmail.com> To: Bitcoin Dev Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2098\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2098) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Why Satoshi's temporary anti-spam measure isn't temporary X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 22:25:55 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_01863E7F-FA27-4C93-83ED-6CBCEC916FBD Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 I only got into Bitcoin in 2011, after the block size limit was already = in place. After going through some more of the early history of Bitcoin = to better understand the origins of this, things are starting to come = into better perspective. Initially there was no block size limit - it was thought that the fee = market would naturally develop and would impose economic constraints on = growth. But this hypothesis failed after a sudden influx of new uses. It = was still too easy to attack the network. This idea had to wait until = the network was more mature to handle things. Enter a =E2=80=9Ctemporary=E2=80=9D anti-spam measure - a one megabyte = block size limit. Let=E2=80=99s test this out, then increase it once we = see how things work. So far so good=E2=80=A6 Except=E2=80=A6well: 1) We never really got to test things out=E2=80=A6a fee market never = really got created, we never got to see how fees would really work in = practice. 2) Turns out the vast majority of validation nodes have little if = anything to do with mining - validators do not get = compensated=E2=80=A6validation cost is externalized to the entire = network. 3) Miners don=E2=80=99t even properly validate blocks. And the bigger = the blocks get, the greater the propensity to skip this step. Oops! 4) A satisfactory mechanism for thin clients to be able to securely = obtain reasonably secure, short proofs for their transactions never = materialized. --Apple-Mail=_01863E7F-FA27-4C93-83ED-6CBCEC916FBD Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJVuAFuAAoJEJNAI64YFENUHBEP/in0LNiR/tYatQJLMZuD+330 TVdOx7p2oICL+22ZX1WIFwTm7D9i3GxTNOuS9rgs/+zY8pvQ3InKLlStTtglp7aY 1LAaTJssd8KyElSN0cSmBFZbZXCzSkkTvIwuB5trc9QYHyS3rgNjjewQvKYg7esU K9ylG5HZBVJHM+uM2LKuwZbHKZev2uJKTR8WXw4yZAIJS1wJ5PeAAsNsYX7hLRxQ CNqAENR8zSPoYjj/Yw+d44TRUc9zgDWt1ZcrQRqq6snxYhffF7jn5Q3NUcUuNFt/ WO2ROYpYt9H6x8D+mP9vqDUkRMUYQ72e1cOnOWqNwBFxovQO985LSZpBEw4UMN4h ltC75Ku5wFnToNmLHVFe+PM4WMwBmvFpt2pOjeJAaTWr/TRe1anCFqbiV/wsB7j4 1bVSrcF9a6ysVbH1x2CvnWV4nYfaCfjV5tE3c3ZscJ90vG0Uv086LjOyLj44txEr b06g1ADc6CEL/iATjqIYzv+eAjeMj3hzYQOhTTSBtkUDlwq5G80PMs8Isowjf64i 1fKhsk82ZRw/q/yQ5Fb8s0uodLtkq1sKBD8EXeR21XPF3+RMteYU+L8DhREhEzQL Wa7cVX+n2oQescdogLagl4QEOvFWZbzMtODC9tkNS5/NATYD98yOc3Awx0yYm0De UAMsSb5HVeq31CZ9D/3A =UwSJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_01863E7F-FA27-4C93-83ED-6CBCEC916FBD--