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
|
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1Z5sk1-0007wL-Ft
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 19 Jun 2015 09:37:41 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.212.172 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.212.172; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
helo=mail-wi0-f172.google.com;
Received: from mail-wi0-f172.google.com ([209.85.212.172])
by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Z5sk0-0004IB-Bh
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 19 Jun 2015 09:37:41 +0000
Received: by wicgi11 with SMTP id gi11so13177559wic.0
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Fri, 19 Jun 2015 02:37:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.209.130 with SMTP id mm2mr23287754wjc.64.1434706654350;
Fri, 19 Jun 2015 02:37:34 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.28.14.196 with HTTP; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 02:37:34 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAOG=w-tf7qz9XSkDg5POKtFLkHWDA==jf2iVxVL8wz1hqcAVOg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <55828737.6000007@riseup.net>
<CABm2gDoa7KxsgvREo3yiNjfd6AeayqAqkjMe2rvX8yyxR_ddcA@mail.gmail.com>
<55831CAB.2080303@jrn.me.uk> <1867667.WXWC1C9quc@crushinator>
<CAOG=w-scXm-46sp2NgR2UUp20R5ujuaAzW-jU_Owh20C4Xc=9A@mail.gmail.com>
<CAJHLa0Mhnma8_ys2ckEA+dLT-EWnqO4j8YKMSaf3Tvv_K14czQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAOG=w-tf7qz9XSkDg5POKtFLkHWDA==jf2iVxVL8wz1hqcAVOg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 11:37:34 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: TyLraSDzRp35B1oV8yY-Kk2b5Zs
Message-ID: <CANEZrP33GCiZHK1GV2Qt_R_AHK6SEjybGPtmORjqgvQ9MiYVZQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Mark Friedenbach <mark@friedenbach.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b3a82e27d55ad0518dbacf7
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
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 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(mh.in.england[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
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: 1Z5sk0-0004IB-Bh
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>,
Gavin Andresen <gavin@bitcoinfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer
to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers
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: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 09:37:41 -0000
--047d7b3a82e27d55ad0518dbacf7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Or alternatively, fix the reasons why users would have negative
> experiences with full blocks
>
It's impossible, Mark. *By definition* if Bitcoin does not have sufficient
capacity for everyone's transactions, some users who were using it will be
kicked out to make way for the others. Whether that happens in some kind of
stable organised way or (as with the current code) a fairly chaotic way
doesn't change the fundamental truth: *some users will find their bitcoin
savings have become uneconomic to spend*.
Here's a recent user complaint that provides a preview of coming
attractions:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/39r3bi/breadwallet_asking_me_to_pay_over_10_network_fee/
Hello, I'm just trying to send my small Sarutobi-tips stash (12,159 bits)
> onto a paper wallet. When I try to send it, a window pops up stating
> "insufficient funds for bitcoin network fee, reduce payment amount by 1,389
> bits?" This would be a fee of $0.32 to send my $2.82, leaving me with $2.50.
These sorts of complaints will get more frequent and more extreme in the
coming months. I realise that nobody at Blockstream is in the position of
running an end user facing service, but many of us are .... and we will be
the ones that face the full anger of ordinary users as Bitcoin hits the
wall.
--047d7b3a82e27d55ad0518dbacf7
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"><blo=
ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left=
-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;paddi=
ng-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmai=
l_quote"><div>Or alternatively, fix the reasons why users would have negati=
ve experiences with full blocks</div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><b=
r></div><div>It's impossible, Mark. <i>By definition</i>=C2=A0if Bitcoi=
n does not have sufficient capacity for everyone's transactions, some u=
sers who were using it will be kicked out to make way for the others. Wheth=
er that happens in some kind of stable organised way or (as with the curren=
t code) a fairly chaotic way doesn't change the fundamental truth: <b>s=
ome users will find their bitcoin savings have become uneconomic to spend</=
b>.</div><div><b><br></b></div><div>Here's a recent user complaint that=
provides a preview of coming attractions:</div><div><br></div><div><a href=
=3D"https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/39r3bi/breadwallet_asking_me_=
to_pay_over_10_network_fee/">https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/39r3=
bi/breadwallet_asking_me_to_pay_over_10_network_fee/</a><br></div><div><br>=
</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;b=
order-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:s=
olid;padding-left:1ex"><span style=3D"font-family:Verdana,arial,sans-serif;=
font-size:14px;line-height:18.2000007629395px">Hello, I'm just trying t=
o send my small Sarutobi-tips stash (12,159 bits) onto a paper wallet. When=
I try to send it, a window pops up stating "insufficient funds for bi=
tcoin network fee, reduce payment amount by 1,389 bits?" This would be=
a fee of $0.32 to send my $2.82, leaving me with $2.50.</span></blockquote=
><div><br></div><div>These sorts of complaints will get more frequent and m=
ore extreme in the coming months. I realise that nobody at Blockstream is =
=C2=A0in the position of running an end user facing service, but many of us=
are .... and we will be the ones that face the full anger of ordinary user=
s as Bitcoin hits the wall.</div></div></div></div>
--047d7b3a82e27d55ad0518dbacf7--
|
