Return-Path: <jk_14@op.pl> Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::138]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17FD0C002D for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 13:43:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1E6083455 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 13:43:26 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org E1E6083455 Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=op.pl header.i=@op.pl header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=2011 header.b=jt5ZRUuG X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hnoOv9bC31-z for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 13:43:25 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org 862E3832E7 Received: from smtpo95.poczta.onet.pl (smtpo95.poczta.onet.pl [213.180.149.148]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 862E3832E7 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 13:43:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pmq6v.m5r2.onet (pmq6v.m5r2.onet [10.174.33.77]) by smtp.poczta.onet.pl (Onet) with ESMTP id 4M78Nj3C2Nzlhcm0; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 15:43:17 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=op.pl; s=2011; t=1660743797; bh=orkCMOAEAvMDTQ+uRMiNHTfNbO6Tlh1pbo+ffVgflzM=; h=From:Cc:To:Date:Subject:From; b=jt5ZRUuGaD+omp3cl9jbCTQCgphb/1eqtMxJQqKCHBUfTkAt7VQybW3hhDTqNXxdF 5MhEKa4udFi6WsgSEocBnW4I1oN7zmswP315rx3R6UVRRAsTB+7Ozm0vPUdA36dWa9 8YCRsxdXh/sqlsRIbPK6pmJ6F7Vc9OTznVGo9pGI= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received: from [89.64.64.124] by pmq6v.m5r2.onet via HTTP id ; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 15:43:17 +0200 From: jk_14@op.pl X-Priority: 3 To: Erik Aronesty <erik@q32.com>, Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 15:43:16 +0200 Message-Id: <73828407-38b211dc3a9d78d44c9b9fb6c2b60b85@pmq6v.m5r2.onet> X-Mailer: onet.poczta X-Onet-PMQ: <jk_144@onet.pl>;89.64.64.124;PL;3 X-ONET_PL-MDA-SEGREGATION: 0 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 14:31:15 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Surprisingly, Tail Emission Is Not Inflationary X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>, <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/> List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>, <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 13:43:27 -0000 On one scale you puts the Trust to the large stakeholders (why we avoid ple= nty of small stakeholders, btw), and on the other side I put game theory and well defined Prisoner's Dilemma. Again: large stakeholders WILL NOT incentivised to mine, they will have the= hundreds excuses why not to switch-on Antminers back. That's how it simply works. Bitcoin would fail miserably if Satoshi was ba= sed his concept mainly on existence of idealists. If we will observe lack of hashrate recovery four years after some halving = and still unprepared like today - means the trust in large stakeholders was a very costly mistake. Superiority of Proof of Work against Proof of Stake has been discussed enou= gh either The overall conclusion with what I fully agree is: swapping PoW to PoS - w= ould be a degradation. You can stop talking about degradation to proof of stake, but just: degrada= tion. Degradation of Bitcoin, due to human greed. Now you mine and you have an INSTANT gratification. Then you will mine and it will cost you real money, but simple switch - and= you have a DELAYED, maybe some day in the future, maybe only a tiny - puni= shment. And The Punishment Won't Be Tiny. "If the pain after hitting the hand with a hammer would appear after a mont= h - people would notoriously walk with swollen fingers" 100% (^2) Regards Jaroslaw W dniu 2022-08-17 13:10:38 u=C5=BCytkownik Erik Aronesty <erik@q32.com> nap= isa=C5=82: > you can stop talking about=C2=A0 the "security of the system" as meaningf= ul > this has been discussed enough > if fees are not sufficient, clearance times increase and large stakeholde= rs are incentivised to mine=C2=A0 > in the best case, fees are sufficient > in the worst case, it degrades to proof of stake > i'm sure you can see how that's fine either=C2=A0way _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev