Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A7DC8AAC for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 17:04:24 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-pd0-f174.google.com (mail-pd0-f174.google.com [209.85.192.174]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99F2B17E for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 17:04:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: by pdjn11 with SMTP id n11so78374152pdj.0 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 10:04:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=xLIP1jYhv4bKlvFBR0TYsJHY0HggdH6MsFhNoQ7NdEw=; b=fdUGZ+WvPor3zikUjGpJ3pF3l8uWlhhfEeGyVfx17oAEUiX0x4gnU63A6PASX0bse4 dpuieOz2E2K9jabViX9TsEk+5fnQvr7AtsYsWIAVtzryMz10FZ0TLDjtgP+lUn1/Mclg Bg7qUFoarR5NHwUvcjBDWf34vJlwefFrG0vXb2KxHBfWq2bxMIwHHrWvfnTMGbaQboit du8x0JBeF5OCLhQaxXIuwPiHwp3yUd1ZB+/8qt/jbfRMhf8zKFsMmO1ySNj4ibKEmJJQ GbAwuN6Z6KqmM32eEBCMj0XMviXt73AgaXOnqMkLUfYxotgqc9JYpdN5xKIiqoIKEX5c uZLQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlIWCYDS3ghP3TtmAYiRMhJncAEgJv2HsLOEMYTtztFrUw7bBpgr3paVLyus56sqUlYdHzS X-Received: by 10.68.201.168 with SMTP id kb8mr5241522pbc.50.1435338263228; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 10:04:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.89] (99-8-65-117.lightspeed.davlca.sbcglobal.net. [99.8.65.117]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id sx5sm10521517pab.4.2015.06.26.10.04.20 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 26 Jun 2015 10:04:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <558D8616.7080204@thinlink.com> Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 10:04:22 -0700 From: Tom Harding User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: venzen@mail.bihthai.net References: <558D71EF.1060603@thinlink.com> <558D7C39.6010603@mail.bihthai.net> In-Reply-To: <558D7C39.6010603@mail.bihthai.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,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 Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] The need for larger blocks 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: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 17:04:24 -0000 Venzen -- The market for block space is not at all the same as the market for bitco= in. The centralization risk that is discussed in relation to the market for block space arises from the resources (network, storage, processor...) required to run a full node. That is a consideration in determining the actual (as opposed to declared) capacity of the system. The 1MB cap was not indexed to increasing resource availability to begin with, so one way to determine the size of any initial hard cap increase would be to estimate the change in resource availability since that time.=