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
|
Return-Path: <tomh@thinlink.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56449305
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 6 Aug 2015 03:14:56 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pd0-f181.google.com (mail-pd0-f181.google.com
[209.85.192.181])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 034411B3
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 6 Aug 2015 03:14:55 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by pdrh1 with SMTP id h1so8503593pdr.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 05 Aug 2015 20:14:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=WEdWGDoOEF4M3lanKSTiusKDJbHB00eiUCV0MC0o/L4=;
b=TszRLJGkFup+yYHZk6CRO2O0E2U8dtn0xZoIY3vUp1rrXPurBYSU1yBAwkng8mFcLr
6FdDmRItvV4v70aCJalrhXiWTiMqW+ZKYWzpr6v3rMi3HK3091klYIczgTXs0qWFms+C
O2EdOqcJiu3B3/5S1q/qDPOUT8mftXDJIp2OEEnvjc0esOR3h5dV48cE9fdiMErsTVWh
V+ZCg7YRmNcAMZYzEq3XYFyBrUfxVdA1gOdy5VvtQJ2HwNBxM38Dq3HDTkWSuCEosthV
nozIuVjlpUz1rOvx7dWLkr5Wow6Ju4phAzdOYWvz3VUgohD6nW44HGxh7JBp2Al/aFJB
0a7g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmCqT/By91FIFwqt7Mb3ZpmBlhXWRcr2qcYBJ0dawSr738NqM9e03+AGwr6PBoxMy/8bfVN
X-Received: by 10.70.43.15 with SMTP id s15mr19229772pdl.14.1438830895684;
Wed, 05 Aug 2015 20:14:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.89] (99-8-65-117.lightspeed.davlca.sbcglobal.net.
[99.8.65.117]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id
wg1sm4503487pbc.7.2015.08.05.20.14.53
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
(version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Wed, 05 Aug 2015 20:14:54 -0700 (PDT)
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
References: <CABm2gDoF41_1g25F-+ujohGTTFPAZJCX+Xg1QPvt=jYijvb32g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tom Harding <tomh@thinlink.com>
X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110
Message-ID: <55C2D12D.7070302@thinlink.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2015 20:14:53 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/38.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CABm2gDoF41_1g25F-+ujohGTTFPAZJCX+Xg1QPvt=jYijvb32g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
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
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Superluminal communication and the consensus
block size limit
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: Thu, 06 Aug 2015 03:14:56 -0000
On 8/5/2015 4:24 PM, Jorge Timón via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Miner A is able to process 100 M tx/block while miner B is only able
> to process 10 M tx/block.
>
B needs to sell ASICs and buy 90 M tx worth of CPU.
Or, if you cap blocksize at 10 M tx, than A needs to sell the exact same
amount of CPU and buy the exact same amount of ASICs.
Either way, Miner A ends up with the ASIC cost equivalent of 90 M tx
worth of CPU in additional hashing advantage over B. The centralization
has nothing to do with block size. It has to do with Miner A having
more money than Miner B.
Alternatively, you might need to add a few more crazy assumptions.
|
