Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 74.125.82.43 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=74.125.82.43; envelope-from=kgreenek@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-wg0-f43.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <201506160341.10994.luke@dashjr.org>
References: <CALqxMTHrnSS9MGgKO-5+=fVhiOOvk12Recs11S0PcSUxQT1wdQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+c4Zoy6U9RXH3Qw15sXXnaeYL-9PFbnTp=VLAJsvpC_zoAK_A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEY8wq41ftFA1ObyUWiRGOgebwqDCAw_j+hU6_wfcXv5GSZaJw@mail.gmail.com>
	<201506160341.10994.luke@dashjr.org>
From: Kevin Greene <kgreenek@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 20:49:43 -0700
Message-ID: <CAEY8wq4SOddGUJNqkrdhhfQEn4tXehCWiifk-P=PYUdfFcXFTQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3844c3585cb05189a78f1
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] The Bitcoin Node Market
Precedence: list

--001a11c3844c3585cb05189a78f1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 8:41 PM, Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:

> On Tuesday, June 16, 2015 3:30:44 AM Kevin Greene wrote:
> > Would SPV wallets have to pay to connect to the network too? From the
> > user's perspective, it would be somewhat upsetting (and confusing) to s=
ee
> > your balance slowly draining every time you open your wallet app. It
> would
> > also tie up outputs every time you open up your wallet. You may go to p=
ay
> > for something in a coffee shop, only to find that you can't spend your
> > bitcoin because the wallet had to create a transaction to pay to sync
> with
> > the network.
> >
> > Also, users of centralized wallet services like Coinbase would not have
> to
> > pay that fee; but users of native wallets like breadwallet would have n=
o
> > such option. This incentivizes users to use centralized wallets.
> >
> > So this is kind of imposing a worse user experience on users who want t=
o
> > use bitcoin the "right" way. That doesn't seem like a good thing to me =
:/
>
> SPV isn't the "right" way either ;)
>

=E2=80=8BHah, fair enough, there is no such thing as the "right" way to do
anything. But I still think punishing users who use SPV wallets is =E2=80=
=8Ba
less-than-ideal way to incentive people to run full nodes. Right now SPV is
the best way that exists for mobile phones to participate in the network in
a decentralized way. This proposal makes the user experience for mobile
wallets a little more confusing and annoying.


>
> If you're running a full node (the real "right way"), you should be able =
to
> earn more bitcoins than you pay out.
>
> Luke
>

--001a11c3844c3585cb05189a78f1
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"color:#336666"><br><=
/div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Mon, Jun =
15, 2015 at 8:41 PM, Luke Dashjr <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:lu=
ke@dashjr.org" target=3D"_blank">luke@dashjr.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><=
blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px=
 #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=3D"">On Tuesday, June 16, 2015 3:=
30:44 AM Kevin Greene wrote:<br>
&gt; Would SPV wallets have to pay to connect to the network too? From the<=
br>
&gt; user&#39;s perspective, it would be somewhat upsetting (and confusing)=
 to see<br>
&gt; your balance slowly draining every time you open your wallet app. It w=
ould<br>
&gt; also tie up outputs every time you open up your wallet. You may go to =
pay<br>
&gt; for something in a coffee shop, only to find that you can&#39;t spend =
your<br>
&gt; bitcoin because the wallet had to create a transaction to pay to sync =
with<br>
&gt; the network.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Also, users of centralized wallet services like Coinbase would not hav=
e to<br>
&gt; pay that fee; but users of native wallets like breadwallet would have =
no<br>
&gt; such option. This incentivizes users to use centralized wallets.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; So this is kind of imposing a worse user experience on users who want =
to<br>
&gt; use bitcoin the &quot;right&quot; way. That doesn&#39;t seem like a go=
od thing to me :/<br>
<br>
</span>SPV isn&#39;t the &quot;right&quot; way either ;)<br></blockquote><d=
iv><br></div><div><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"color:rgb(51,102,10=
2)">=E2=80=8BHah, fair enough, there is no such thing as the &quot;right&qu=
ot; way to do anything. But I still think punishing users who use SPV walle=
ts is =E2=80=8Ba less-than-ideal way to incentive people to run full nodes.=
 Right now SPV is the best way that exists for mobile phones to participate=
 in the network in a decentralized way. This proposal makes the user experi=
ence for mobile wallets a little more confusing and annoying.</div></div><d=
iv>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex=
;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
If you&#39;re running a full node (the real &quot;right way&quot;), you sho=
uld be able to<br>
earn more bitcoins than you pay out.<br>
<span class=3D"HOEnZb"><font color=3D"#888888"><br>
Luke<br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div></div>

--001a11c3844c3585cb05189a78f1--