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
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <jgarzik@bitpay.com>) id 1YqNMe-0003E4-Dq
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 07 May 2015 15:05:28 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bitpay.com
designates 209.85.214.173 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.214.173; envelope-from=jgarzik@bitpay.com;
helo=mail-ob0-f173.google.com;
Received: from mail-ob0-f173.google.com ([209.85.214.173])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1YqNMa-0004mQ-EY
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 07 May 2015 15:05:28 +0000
Received: by obbkp3 with SMTP id kp3so33499409obb.3
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Thu, 07 May 2015 08:05:18 -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=Svtfc0ggeMxUuKXUm5LxvZVASh5QKzBwwoHph5LYDAo=;
b=ASeuqmwEk3cGWyS7dtWR58afF+SkpJa6dex1LKtmUuKofLZyimHCP1UwUKrtmDFMMg
I+WXf7Pri6iFaJJT1t2wUseTp0FJOW6Jf5jj2mkUJzzLWi5aD+Oyscgcf7zK6mPV7Vel
tdYk0QPdm52vrpqiOz/W8P6oT20Ic5+HdDni30IDwE5vdfw3ezs/CHVxjM5ySocQeDZq
3mW73GpKcDF+AXiJCA1JPW7pNjqkHTWPiYjhwBnCeO3StQdQgpsz9MCTdM5kt5X+3wUF
XuU9zmTHgpjsIYRwcdUOQohPKAwN5rNvVLMRecXplMT7iRLy1a/a6rbFosTtNjagCWGI
yMww==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl86CofC4apTIdVz7duoTbt+FUSRIi1g7rhEH/v25vxh7/KC0gALJkAh6sLbiYdNUUpQugb
X-Received: by 10.202.224.11 with SMTP id x11mr3349791oig.33.1431011118790;
Thu, 07 May 2015 08:05:18 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.202.108.149 with HTTP; Thu, 7 May 2015 08:04:58 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <554B78DE.20600@localhost.local>
References: <554A91BE.6060105@bluematt.me>
<CANEZrP3wGWHdz+ut6pvke5TJJsc1rTFt8sn2KziX35oL5LAsyg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAJHLa0Mr6aQcVRKtidc+qVR7-esriyp5kzAw1LMHHwOcXhhG+Q@mail.gmail.com>
<554B78DE.20600@localhost.local>
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com>
Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 11:04:58 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJHLa0OXpbAeDsQknR0HewasPq0PYPLNU3yWJ+xzerB6CXX7jw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Justus Ranvier <justusranvier@riseup.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113d42e067cf2e05157f3df0
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: 1YqNMa-0004mQ-EY
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase
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: Thu, 07 May 2015 15:05:28 -0000
--001a113d42e067cf2e05157f3df0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 10:38 AM, Justus Ranvier <justusranvier@riseup.net>
wrote:
> On 05/07/2015 04:04 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > - This is a major change to the economics of a $3.2B system. This
> > change picks winners and losers. There is attendant moral hazard.
>
> This is exactly true.
>
> There are a number of projects which aren't Bitcoin that benefit from
> filling in the gap left by Bitcoin's restricted transaction rate
> capability.
>
> If Bitcoin fills that gap, Bitcoin wins and those other projects lose.
>
> Should decisions about Bitcoin development take into account the
> desires of competing projects?
heh - I tend to think people here want bitcoin to succeed. My statement
refers to picking winners and losers from within the existing bitcoin
community & stakeholders.
The existential question of the block size increase is larger - will
failing to increase the 1MB limit permanently stunt bitcoin's growth?
--001a113d42e067cf2e05157f3df0
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 T=
hu, May 7, 2015 at 10:38 AM, Justus Ranvier <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=
=3D"mailto:justusranvier@riseup.net" target=3D"_blank">justusranvier@riseup=
.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"ma=
rgin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=3D=
"">On 05/07/2015 04:04 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:<br>
> - This is a major change to the economics of a $3.2B system.=C2=A0 Thi=
s<br>
> change picks winners and losers.=C2=A0 There is attendant moral hazard=
.<br>
<br>
</span>This is exactly true.<br>
<br>
There are a number of projects which aren't Bitcoin that benefit from<b=
r>
filling in the gap left by Bitcoin's restricted transaction rate<br>
capability.<br>
<br>
If Bitcoin fills that gap, Bitcoin wins and those other projects lose.<br>
<br>
Should decisions about Bitcoin development take into account the<br>
desires of competing projects?</blockquote><div><br></div><div>heh - I tend=
to think people here want bitcoin to succeed.=C2=A0 My statement refers to=
picking winners and losers from within the existing bitcoin community &=
; stakeholders.<br><br></div><div>The existential question of the block siz=
e increase is larger - will failing to increase the 1MB limit permanently s=
tunt bitcoin's growth?<br><br></div><div><br>=C2=A0<br></div></div></di=
v></div>
--001a113d42e067cf2e05157f3df0--
|
