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
|
Return-Path: <elombrozo@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46364B88
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 27 Jun 2015 11:18:38 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pa0-f44.google.com (mail-pa0-f44.google.com
[209.85.220.44])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BFE4312C
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 27 Jun 2015 11:18:37 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by padev16 with SMTP id ev16so81391614pad.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 27 Jun 2015 04:18:37 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc
:message-id:references:to;
bh=qtAsSbhFfY2pg9dceHz44SFEgsJtCieZsyQwok1nfs8=;
b=NSUAOmVy5cWGC/B4O5l3d7L9B4XaXPL4Iofk3EmlK9wvJUkpahL62hQfpuyCeIs1HB
bsZ6u5rNBUSGQISQ7EaVdRsxIOlYN4DIcV6J+e5dSxwaYWjvv6YwjS8F/8kzRjT8h2uH
ZiFw9twLDum8bI/MkqET4kwhkP20S8PyYEibv6JGtquJK+j6CFMRGoWpCkGaSUkGY7NJ
Mfdi9TZ1Jk+G3GU5Gg0ztZKiJWz00xR+Fmu5r8izu2C1PDrMboXliBGmw2pvWQmf52ww
NYvYZ80Lrydt8Whq1Ut3YvMoYFCpn05nC7h92yZ4ifBxMBz3sSA0YuCEFe1xfs3THaso
QOwQ==
X-Received: by 10.68.130.98 with SMTP id od2mr12375618pbb.73.1435403917521;
Sat, 27 Jun 2015 04:18:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.102] (cpe-76-167-237-202.san.res.rr.com.
[76.167.237.202]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id
oa14sm36232952pdb.47.2015.06.27.04.18.35
(version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
Sat, 27 Jun 2015 04:18:36 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2098\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
boundary="Apple-Mail=_7CF2C3EF-74CC-4849-AE15-C700A680FA2D";
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.5b6
From: Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABm2gDpnzjph5SKTf+8GWgwe+njS=k2GNm9uL73RC-EV=Y5wug@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 04:18:33 -0700
Message-Id: <1E68C70C-B33E-4414-B48B-7A497B59C893@gmail.com>
References: <CAPg+sBjOj9eXiDG0F6G54SVKkStF_1HRu2wzGqtFF5X_NAWy4w@mail.gmail.com>
<20150627074259.GA25420@amethyst.visucore.com>
<20150627095501.C59B541A40@smtp.hushmail.com>
<20150627100400.GC25420@amethyst.visucore.com>
<20150627102912.06E2641A3E@smtp.hushmail.com>
<CABm2gDpnzjph5SKTf+8GWgwe+njS=k2GNm9uL73RC-EV=Y5wug@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?utf-8?Q?Jorge_Tim=C3=B3n?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2098)
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM,
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 <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: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 11:18:38 -0000
--Apple-Mail=_7CF2C3EF-74CC-4849-AE15-C700A680FA2D
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=utf-8
The economic policy=E2=80=99s status quo has been to avoid fee pressure. =
But the consensus status quo obviously is not to have a hard fork.
There=E2=80=99s clearly a contradiction between these two policies, =
which is a big part of the reason this issue has come to this point. =
These two policies are fundamentally at odds.
- Eric Lombrozo
> On Jun 27, 2015, at 4:04 AM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <jtimon@jtimon.cc> =
wrote:
>=20
> On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 12:29 PM, NxtChg <nxtchg@hush.com> wrote:
>>=20
>> On 6/27/2015 at 1:04 PM, "Wladimir J. van der Laan" =
<laanwj@gmail.com> wrote:
>>=20
>>> Then you won't risk the other 'passengers' who don't consent to it.
>>=20
>> But you can look at it the other way: what about risking the =
'passengers' when the plane suddenly doesn't fly anymore?
>>=20
>> Increasing block limit increases the risk of centralization, but it =
also keeps the current status quo of blocks not being filled, rather =
then risking an unknown option of hitting the limit hard.
>=20
> But that option is not unknown, that's the point of this thread.
> "Doing nothing" would require to fix the mempool to scale with the
> number of unconfirmed transaction. This is something that we will
> eventually have to fix unless the plan is to eventually remove the
> blocksize limit.
> What will happen with full blocks is that fees will likely rise and
> the transactions with bigger fees will get confirmed first. This is
> something that will eventually happen unless the blocksize limit is
> removed before ever being hit.
> What this thread is saying is that this option (the so-called "doing
> nothing" option, which actually requires more work than any of the
> current proposals for increasing the blocksize) is perfectly valid,
> which is in contradiction to a perceived "need to increase the
> blocksize limit soon". Increasing the block size is only an option,
> not a "need". And changing the consensus rules and forcing everybody
> to adapt their software to the changes is certainly not "maintaining
> the status quo", I'm getting tired of hearing that absurd notion.
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
--Apple-Mail=_7CF2C3EF-74CC-4849-AE15-C700A680FA2D
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org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=+ujz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--Apple-Mail=_7CF2C3EF-74CC-4849-AE15-C700A680FA2D--
|
