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
|
Return-Path: <hectorchu@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 88E9D8A7
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 5 Aug 2015 11:36:16 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-la0-f46.google.com (mail-la0-f46.google.com
[209.85.215.46])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB0007C
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 5 Aug 2015 11:36:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by labow3 with SMTP id ow3so26693646lab.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 05 Aug 2015 04:36:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc:content-type;
bh=kk6wAmKz8KIxeaC19u9wE4hvK1iKs86sGrEqa4nBXFQ=;
b=wOX8GHUaIrcjlQ9IfNxlTv4K4mw0lZWKYGOVsswOJpC81WTcxpXHWcfcgLYR5B6fWQ
SyME37dskfDIasgx3C2ke6aJqEnZzLDt9HStnO2oslweWWYNM/62cm4hcuU9r/0p0E5e
WoIqWeT4T+AZnjIfbJAHaeQMI/CcS59hbvCDUbjbqzS4e8eeftRqBzyDnp4fEF86Gb+R
eWN1CJdHsU6iE19PcNWMnNj1EmxvMXDwHRZf3LnX0d04xNnH80Rc7WTy1uGJMUeyrhYq
buKgnZ9OesmOO9hMQO/pNh70TohjG/12qlTizAT7iBpEy6cGT9VpUN+p6wB3cqSJOhAy
THJw==
X-Received: by 10.112.77.103 with SMTP id r7mr8721022lbw.63.1438774573564;
Wed, 05 Aug 2015 04:36:13 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.25.22.25 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Aug 2015 04:35:53 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CALqxMTH9K1WrZo9RUBmK93y_42ffe_Ni7yJFrghJy_7EZMM8Eg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABsx9T1E1s=4h-SxLTOAXK4GniZrUekcEb6zDdTDFG+h7X98MA@mail.gmail.com>
<1438640036.2828.0.camel@auspira.com>
<CABsx9T2A-Mz9z=TTifbL2_sKCDvy8coRpNse+0vff6EbXbp8cg@mail.gmail.com>
<BF420F3B-044C-46F6-8880-FEEB9A3DC748@gmx.com>
<CAOoPuRb=wDKOoRXuqktDypyJ_gs1w5WORx4+LH84AOEv_PY1ZQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAO2FKGPeBnpB0X3fvqkX+Wy6wOO+m1ZPhEup0Hvv4_nhcRUKA@mail.gmail.com>
<CALqxMTGiSdh64G9LVLoCCio3fLNaXUY9v0BeMZV+ZiN6ShY0Ew@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAO2FKGjarDHVyF0kJ39iS=QPQ_XrB97=dgHVVwSyih05EjJsQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CALqxMTH9K1WrZo9RUBmK93y_42ffe_Ni7yJFrghJy_7EZMM8Eg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Hector Chu <hectorchu@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2015 12:35:53 +0100
Message-ID: <CAAO2FKGwf0yNFT1VaSVQ7B88YRnSaGONrCrTxuVoe4d0ryw5mA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Adam Back <adam@cypherspace.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3f0265e88ed051c8ecf4d
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,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 <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] "A Transaction Fee Market Exists Without a Block
Size Limit"--new research paper suggests
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: Wed, 05 Aug 2015 11:36:16 -0000
--001a11c3f0265e88ed051c8ecf4d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On 5 August 2015 at 12:07, Adam Back <adam@cypherspace.org> wrote:
> This prediction market in block-size seems like something extremely
> complex to operate and keep secure in a decentralised fashion.
Why would it need to be decentralised? Bitcoin.org could run the exchange,
and the profits from the exchange could be used to fund Core development.
We also have no particular reason to suppose other than
> meta-incentive, that it should result in a secure parameter set.
>
Security is a continuous variable, trading off against others. If security
gradually begins to be threatened as a result of block size gradually
increasing, the concerns of users will be enough that the bears will gain
control over the bulls on the block size market.
I suspect that, while it is interesting in the abstract, it risks
> converting a complex security problem into an even more complex one,
> rather than constituting an incremental security improvement which is
> more the context of day to day discussions here.
Hard problems call for complex solutions.
--001a11c3f0265e88ed051c8ecf4d
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On 5=
August 2015 at 12:07, Adam Back <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:ad=
am@cypherspace.org" target=3D"_blank">adam@cypherspace.org</a>></span> w=
rote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;borde=
r-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">This prediction market in block-siz=
e seems like something extremely<br>
complex to operate and keep secure in a decentralised fashion.</blockquote>=
<div><br></div><div>Why would it need to be decentralised? Bitcoin.org coul=
d run the exchange, and the profits from the exchange could be used to fund=
Core development.</div><div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" st=
yle=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">We al=
so have no particular reason to suppose other than<br>
meta-incentive, that it should result in a secure parameter set.<br></block=
quote><div><br></div><div>Security is a continuous variable, trading off ag=
ainst others. If security gradually begins to be threatened as a result of =
block size gradually increasing, the concerns of users will be enough that =
the bears will gain control over the bulls on the block size market.</div><=
div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;=
border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I suspect that, while it is interesting in the abstract, it risks<br>
converting a complex security problem into an even more complex one,<br>
rather than constituting an incremental security improvement which is<br>
more the context of day to day discussions here.</blockquote><div><br></div=
><div>Hard problems call for complex solutions.=C2=A0</div></div></div></di=
v>
--001a11c3f0265e88ed051c8ecf4d--
|
