1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
|
Return-Path: <jim@ergophobia.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7EB969A
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 3 Aug 2015 06:53:17 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wi0-f177.google.com (mail-wi0-f177.google.com
[209.85.212.177])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 06BB3106
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 3 Aug 2015 06:53:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wibud3 with SMTP id ud3so122747405wib.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 02 Aug 2015 23:53:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
bh=ZKM1SSPHd8tL59vBDd0u/ldp5lhlGzADTy/yS2nJkuQ=;
b=T77uWFCaWb7CKVL4Meb7Z2Nuu0U/rvUXCtWSrxvc34mByYfmPSxghPs7oPjgAazrh+
RTDDZfpgDCo+pZDkZTsIqyK0lprJcw8ZL+X6ILBZAmcGYeD4yqGDXijFJtrq71wcXECS
ZvBHgE+ROcVDQxmkEif5iMkEImLU0ZJZ8QT2hkoNbL94LrBU8y/5Tmi0F6O4aQ7zV542
SWH2J9H35RZIMybkpbWgGDZS9kCtuRVuk3GykIgt1m/NBL22enhwv/eUqnnycVLha7qu
VIHY/Ec5p1Ht5C4odVry2iDDZSqDfGoLbazWqwBef/E7j69DebJlb51DCVvUIUo7Ci3T
p2hA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnVS45/VDKAI7UPEPKvbtwNj9IMvBxpHhnchF2QFUZO6VDbVTlKLJdfroejX7BLG2XL/kqU
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.78.19 with SMTP id x19mr5581078wjw.50.1438584794588;
Sun, 02 Aug 2015 23:53:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.15.193 with HTTP; Sun, 2 Aug 2015 23:53:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.15.193 with HTTP; Sun, 2 Aug 2015 23:53:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CALqxMTEMajz6oHnGvocxy=xDFMBc1LaX1iWYM=w1PF0rH3syFg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANe1mWxsAPzWut_gDqe4R-SkDPBYM392NzeVqbUzjwh+pydsWQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CALqxMTEMajz6oHnGvocxy=xDFMBc1LaX1iWYM=w1PF0rH3syFg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2015 01:53:13 -0500
Message-ID: <CANe1mWzm2+qRh43bxdbE-VAbQKRJFiD5ss7wZV6x+FGCGV+FCA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jim Phillips <jim@ergophobia.org>
To: Adam Back <adam@cypherspace.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bf0cf60a943c7051c629fce
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,T_REMOTE_IMAGE 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 <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] A reason we can all agree on to increase block
size
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development 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: Mon, 03 Aug 2015 06:53:17 -0000
--047d7bf0cf60a943c7051c629fce
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Yes I've had a couple other people point that out to me as well and the
logic is sound. Unfortunately that doesn't help solve the actual issue that
mining is currently consolidated within the jurisdiction of a single
political body that is not exactly Bitcoin friendly. I don't know how to
solve that issue aside from pointing it out and hoping miners outside of
China point to different pools and build more farms in smaller countries.
Venezuela for example has cheap electricity and could be a good place to
mine. Iceland too.
On Aug 3, 2015 1:34 AM, "Adam Back" <adam@cypherspace.org> wrote:
> If block-sizes are increased in a way detrimental to the Chinese miners,
> it is not the Chinese miners that lose, it is all of the non-Chinese miners
> - this is because the Chinese miners have the slight majority of the
> hashrate. The relatively low external bandwidth connecting China to the
> net is actually the problem of the non-Chinese miners problem. Non Chinese
> miners will experience higher orphan rate once Chinese miners cease to
> build on top of blocks that are too large to sync in a timely fashion into
> China.
>
> Adam
>
> On 2 August 2015 at 23:02, Jim Phillips via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> China is a communist country. It is no secret that all "capitalist"
>> enterprises are essentially State controlled, or at the very least are
>> subject to nationalization should the State deem it necessary. Most ASIC
>> chips are manufactured in China, so they are cheap and accessible to
>> Chinese miners. Electricity is subsidized and essentially free. Cooling is
>> not an issue since large parts of China are mountainous and naturally cool.
>> In short the Chinese miners have HUGE advantages over all other mining
>> operations. This is probably why, between just the top 4 Chinese miners,
>> the People's Republic of China effectively controls 57% of all the Bitcoin
>> being mined.
>>
>> The ONLY disadvantage the Chinese miners have in competing with the rest
>> of the world is bandwidth. China has poor connectivity with the rest of the
>> world, and Chinese miners have said that an increase in the block size
>> would be detrimental to them. I say, GOOD! Most of the free world has
>> enough bandwidth to be able to handle larger blocks. We need to take
>> advantage of that fact to get mining out of the centralized control of the
>> Chinese.
>>
>> If you're truly worried about larger blocks causing centralization, think
>> about how, by restricting blocksize, you're enabling the Communist Chinese
>> government to maintain centralized control over 57% of the Bitcoin hashing
>> power.
>>
>> --
>> *James G. Phillips IV*
>> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/113107039501292625391/posts>
>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ergophobe>
>>
>> *"Don't bunt. Aim out of the ball park. Aim for the company of
>> immortals." -- David Ogilvy*
>>
>> *This message was created with 100% recycled electrons. Please think
>> twice before printing.*
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
>>
>
--047d7bf0cf60a943c7051c629fce
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<p dir=3D"ltr">Yes I've had a couple other people point that out to me =
as well and the logic is sound. Unfortunately that doesn't help solve t=
he actual issue that mining is currently consolidated within the jurisdicti=
on of a single political body that is not exactly Bitcoin friendly. I don&#=
39;t know how to solve that issue aside from pointing it out and hoping min=
ers outside of China point to different pools and build more farms in small=
er countries. Venezuela for example has cheap electricity and could be a go=
od place to mine. Iceland too. </p>
<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Aug 3, 2015 1:34 AM, "Adam Back" &l=
t;<a href=3D"mailto:adam@cypherspace.org">adam@cypherspace.org</a>> wrot=
e:<br type=3D"attribution"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margi=
n:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr">=
If block-sizes are increased in a way detrimental to the Chinese miners, it=
is not the Chinese miners that lose, it is all of the non-Chinese miners -=
this is because the Chinese miners have the slight majority of the hashrat=
e.=C2=A0 The relatively low external bandwidth connecting China to the net =
is actually the problem of the non-Chinese miners problem.=C2=A0 Non Chines=
e miners will experience higher orphan rate once Chinese miners cease to bu=
ild on top of blocks that are too large to sync in a timely fashion into Ch=
ina.<div><br>Adam</div></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"g=
mail_quote">On 2 August 2015 at 23:02, Jim Phillips via bitcoin-dev <span d=
ir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" tar=
get=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>></span> wrote:<=
br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left=
:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>China is a communis=
t country. It is no secret that all "capitalist" enterprises are =
essentially State controlled, or at the very least are subject to nationali=
zation should the State deem it necessary. Most ASIC chips are manufactured=
in China, so they are cheap and accessible to Chinese miners. Electricity =
is subsidized and essentially free. Cooling is not an issue since large par=
ts of China are mountainous and naturally cool. In short the Chinese miners=
have HUGE advantages over all other mining operations. This is probably wh=
y, between just the top 4 Chinese miners, the People's Republic of Chin=
a effectively controls 57% of all the Bitcoin being mined.</div><div><br></=
div><div>The ONLY disadvantage the Chinese miners have in competing with th=
e rest of the world is bandwidth. China has poor connectivity with the rest=
of the world, and Chinese miners have said that an increase in the block s=
ize would be detrimental to them. I say, GOOD! Most of the free world has e=
nough bandwidth to be able to handle larger blocks. We need to take advanta=
ge of that fact to get mining out of the centralized control of the Chinese=
.</div><div><br></div><div>If you're truly worried about larger blocks =
causing centralization, think about how, by restricting blocksize, you'=
re enabling the Communist Chinese government to maintain centralized contro=
l over 57% of the Bitcoin hashing power.</div><div><br></div><div><div><div=
>--<div><b>James G. Phillips IV</b>=C2=A0<a href=3D"https://plus.google.com=
/u/0/113107039501292625391/posts" style=3D"font-size:x-small" target=3D"_bl=
ank"><img src=3D"https://ssl.gstatic.com/images/icons/gplus-16.png"></a>=C2=
=A0<a href=3D"http://www.linkedin.com/in/ergophobe" target=3D"_blank"><img =
src=3D"http://developer.linkedin.com/sites/default/files/LinkedIn_Logo16px.=
png"></a></div></div><div><font size=3D"1"><i>"Don't bunt. Aim out=
of the ball park. Aim for the company of immortals." -- David Ogilvy<=
br></i></font><div><font size=3D"1"><br></font></div></div><div><font size=
=3D"1"><img src=3D"http://findicons.com/files/icons/1156/fugue/16/leaf.png"=
>=C2=A0<em style=3D"background-color:rgb(255,255,255);font-family:verdana,g=
eneva,sans-serif;line-height:16px;color:green">This message was created wit=
h 100% recycled electrons. Please think twice before printing.</em></font><=
/div></div></div>
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>
</blockquote></div>
--047d7bf0cf60a943c7051c629fce--
|
