MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <2621205.8A4FuXh9CI@strawberry>
References: <CAOyfL0oQrHzDmHBnWo0pTdbVU7acnsLmikTh9NU_u6HnhT4VCw@mail.gmail.com>
	<2621205.8A4FuXh9CI@strawberry>
From: Martin Stolze <martin@stolze.cc>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 13:48:42 +0100
Message-ID: <CAOyfL0oQ8dKECqSdguo5NnSpdVcYMkNKT1pWC8+aGsG2HOY-0Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tom Zander <tomz@freedommail.ch>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Inquiry: Transaction Tiering
Precedence: list

Ignoring your contradiction of the political and economical. Your
conception holds under the presupposition that all action of
hash-power is motivated by 'rational' economic interest. Specifically
a very strict distinction between the profitable and the unprofitable;
namely to include transactions based on "business incentive",
presumably on-chain fees.

I am afraid that this conception is a rickety crutch, unfit to
navigate current reality.


On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Tom Zander <tomz@freedommail.ch> wrote:
> On Monday, 20 March 2017 21:12:36 CEST Martin Stolze via bitcoin-dev wrot=
e:
>> Background: The current protocol enables two parties to transact
>> freely, however, transaction processors (block generators) have the
>> authority to discriminate participants arbitrarily.
>
> Nag; they don=E2=80=99t have any authority.
>
>> This is well known
>> and it is widely accepted that transaction processors may take
>> advantage of this with little recourse. It is the current consensus
>> that the economic incentives in form of transaction fees are
>> sufficient because the transaction processing authorities are assumed
>> to be guided by the growth of Bitcoin and the pursuit of profit.
>
> This is not the case, it misunderstands Bitcoin and specifically is
> misunderstands that Bitcoin is distributed and decentralized.
>
> What you call =E2=80=9Cblock generators=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9Ctransaction =
processors=E2=80=9D are in reality
> called miners and they don=E2=80=99t have any authority to mine or not mi=
ne certain
> transactions. All they have is a business incentive to mine or not mine a
> certain transaction.
> This is a crucial distinction as that makes it a economical decision, not=
 a
> political.
>
> The massive distribution of miners creating blocks means that one miner i=
s
> free to add his political agenda. They can choose to not mine any satoshi=
-
> dice transactions, should they want. But they can=E2=80=99t stop other mi=
ners from
> mining those transactions anyway, and as such this is not a political mov=
e
> that has any effect whatsoever, at the end of the day it is just an
> economcal decision.
>
> The rest of your email is based on this misconception as well, and theref=
ore
> the above answers your question.
> --
> Tom Zander
> Blog: https://zander.github.io
> Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel