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
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <jgarzik@bitpay.com>) id 1Z40bZ-0003zK-8L
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 14 Jun 2015 05:37:13 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bitpay.com
designates 209.85.214.176 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.214.176; envelope-from=jgarzik@bitpay.com;
helo=mail-ob0-f176.google.com;
Received: from mail-ob0-f176.google.com ([209.85.214.176])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Z40bY-0001mP-7A
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 14 Jun 2015 05:37:13 +0000
Received: by obcej4 with SMTP id ej4so45555452obc.0
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Sat, 13 Jun 2015 22:37:06 -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:from:date
:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type;
bh=cHMR+N8L/Sv+6ne3GvZXzaySzIayByGWUXI9Qh4kbEo=;
b=aVK9vVMh/+5gcKeBPxkN7/U+kBt1LHCtzZwFLMRuWRaG38aJSeFihiEGXz8cLRaFFS
eEmKUdeDzk4QCatYOUlVA+SgkXBWF21AUXAqMSSo14laEv70Hq1U+lfW5bJW+gQHwjRY
UhkFzfRCFsQP/tQYASotm4FrwZTjYOhggc5v8Ykh9OB3d/WtvnjM7N8NVEXLuu9+OtlP
m6EVDpSFlXt+4tizvuRLVp00qTdmpK5/nRPguMPszzcJ6j0QtWI5V2arTo2VaaRn8j3G
DVktpN24Re/vml1Ka+TfLhfZIlLutkj1lHzwqMLSf5ThBEYRbdkVZNhy7wJZKsGzLgbw
XsbA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnJrbkFT7vuzwz1woL7p8oIFXd+cQsECKAxQxL4TBw4Le3GEft3QT8WVToda3Dha7/lnWV/
X-Received: by 10.182.87.36 with SMTP id u4mr18702235obz.50.1434260226801;
Sat, 13 Jun 2015 22:37:06 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.202.108.149 with HTTP; Sat, 13 Jun 2015 22:36:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <04527D50-0118-4E74-8226-3E29B29CC7D8@gmail.com>
References: <20150612181153.GB19199@muck>
<CAJN5wHVj=KfQ3_KYOKee9uq4LNPwQ7x5nGuKDHEMUqGF4LSDLg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAFzgq-y5xBSXexVi0mJw_w89R2_AHJCgmj=gLN4CK_-YaO4-eg@mail.gmail.com>
<3BB36FC7-9212-42A1-A756-A66929C15D4F@gmail.com>
<CAJHLa0Oh0wm_1SynFdCu+WkVD-gTGk0ZUNgQV0GVj0-3zL=zzw@mail.gmail.com>
<04527D50-0118-4E74-8226-3E29B29CC7D8@gmail.com>
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2015 01:36:45 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJHLa0NrNqECvqhJWNX=rt3-h4U3jwFWoMCrcbyC6hUT5EqWbw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013d0ddc559949051873bb07
X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1Z40bY-0001mP-7A
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] User vote in blocksize through fees
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2015 05:37:13 -0000
--089e013d0ddc559949051873bb07
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The choice is very real and on-point. What should the block size limit
be? Why?
There is a large consensus that it needs increasing. To what? By what
factor?
The size limit literally defines the fee market, the whole damn thing. If
software high priests choose a size limit of 300k, space is scarce, fees
are bid high. If software high priests choose a size limit of 32mb, space
is plentiful, fees are near zero. Market actors take their signals
accordingly. Some business models boom, some business models fail, as a
direct result of changing this unintentionally-added speedbump. Different
users value adoption, decentralization etc. differently.
The size limit is an economic policy lever that needs to be transitioned
-away- from software and software developers, to the free market.
A simple, e.g. hard fork to 2MB or 4MB does not fix higher level governance
problems associated with actors lobbying developers, even if a cloistered
and vetted Technical Advisory Board as has been proposed.
On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 1:20 AM, Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com> wrote:
> I definitely think we need some voting system for metaconsensus=E2=80=A6b=
ut if
> we=E2=80=99re going to seriously consider this we should look at the prob=
lem much
> more generally. Using false choices doesn=E2=80=99t really help, though ;=
)
>
> - Eric Lombrozo
>
>
> On Jun 13, 2015, at 10:13 PM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 1:08 AM, Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> 2) BIP100 has direct economic consequences=E2=80=A6and particularly for =
miners.
>> It lends itself to much greater corruptibility.
>>
>>
> What is the alternative? Have a Chief Scientist or Technical Advisory
> Board choose what is a proper fee, what is a proper level of
> decentralization, a proper growth factor?
>
>
>
--=20
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/
--089e013d0ddc559949051873bb07
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">The choice is very real and on-point.=C2=A0 What should th=
e block size limit be?=C2=A0 Why?<div><br></div><div>There is a large conse=
nsus that it needs increasing.=C2=A0 To what?=C2=A0 By what factor?</div><d=
iv><br></div><div>The size limit literally defines the fee market, the whol=
e damn thing.=C2=A0 If software high priests choose a size limit of 300k, s=
pace is scarce, fees are bid high.=C2=A0 If software high priests choose a =
size limit of 32mb, space is plentiful, fees are near zero.=C2=A0 Market ac=
tors take their signals accordingly.=C2=A0 Some business models boom, some =
business models fail, as a direct result of changing this unintentionally-a=
dded speedbump.=C2=A0 Different users value adoption, decentralization etc.=
differently.</div><div><br></div><div>The size limit is an economic policy=
lever that needs to be transitioned -away- from software and software deve=
lopers, to the free market.</div><div><br></div><div>A simple, e.g. hard fo=
rk to 2MB or 4MB does not fix higher level governance problems associated w=
ith actors lobbying developers, even if a cloistered and vetted Technical A=
dvisory Board as has been proposed.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div=
><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><div class=3D=
"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 1:20 A=
M, Eric Lombrozo <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:elombrozo@gmail.co=
m" target=3D"_blank">elombrozo@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquo=
te class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc so=
lid;padding-left:1ex"><div style=3D"word-wrap:break-word">I definitely thin=
k we need some voting system for metaconsensus=E2=80=A6but if we=E2=80=99re=
going to seriously consider this we should look at the problem much more g=
enerally. Using false choices doesn=E2=80=99t really help, though ;)<span c=
lass=3D"HOEnZb"><font color=3D"#888888"><div><br></div></font></span><div><=
span class=3D"HOEnZb"><font color=3D"#888888">- Eric Lombrozo</font></span>=
<span class=3D""><br><div><br><div><br><div><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div>=
On Jun 13, 2015, at 10:13 PM, Jeff Garzik <<a href=3D"mailto:jgarzik@bit=
pay.com" target=3D"_blank">jgarzik@bitpay.com</a>> wrote:</div><br><div>=
<span style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-=
variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;=
text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;wor=
d-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at =
1:08 AM, Eric Lombrozo<span>=C2=A0</span></span><span dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"=
font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;=
font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:star=
t;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px">=
<<a href=3D"mailto:elombrozo@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">elombrozo@gmai=
l.com</a>></span><span style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;fon=
t-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal=
;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;wh=
ite-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important"><spa=
n>=C2=A0</span>wrote:</span><br style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12=
px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:=
normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:n=
one;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><div class=3D"gmail_extra" style=
=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant:nor=
mal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:=
start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0=
px"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"m=
argin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204=
,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">2) BIP100 has direct econom=
ic consequences=E2=80=A6and particularly for miners. It lends itself to muc=
h greater corruptibility.<br><br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>What is t=
he alternative?=C2=A0 Have a Chief Scientist or Technical Advisory Board ch=
oose what is a proper fee, what is a proper level of decentralization, a pr=
oper growth factor?</div></div></div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></d=
iv></span></div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear=3D"all"><div><br></d=
iv>-- <br><div class=3D"gmail_signature">Jeff Garzik<br>Bitcoin core develo=
per and open source evangelist<br>BitPay, Inc. =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0<a href=
=3D"https://bitpay.com/" target=3D"_blank">https://bitpay.com/</a></div>
</div>
--089e013d0ddc559949051873bb07--
|
