summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/4f/543e09a64b148e2b937d7f75a622f1a2134cf6
blob: 0c939ba89decdbf7353b22cde558383ee77ae349 (plain)
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
Return-Path: <pete@petertodd.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C174273
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sat, 27 Jun 2015 16:37:41 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from outmail148107.authsmtp.com (outmail148107.authsmtp.com
	[62.13.148.107])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A41E0A4
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sat, 27 Jun 2015 16:37:40 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-c237.authsmtp.com (mail-c237.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.237])
	by punt18.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t5RGbZl2059971;
	Sat, 27 Jun 2015 17:37:35 +0100 (BST)
Received: from muck (cpe-74-66-142-58.nyc.res.rr.com [74.66.142.58])
	(authenticated bits=128)
	by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t5RGbVNt079895
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
	Sat, 27 Jun 2015 17:37:33 +0100 (BST)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 12:37:31 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Michael Naber <mickeybob@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20150627163731.GA12820@muck>
References: <CALgxB7udA85BWetBGc-RN=72ZtVPK9Q5HW8YRDKA08M38XqJqQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALqxMTHjszPcf=S20kquF=5y3zfYb+foP6tL1okOT2jhdrW08A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALgxB7tdFsQXzGRje=suC7Yaym_Whhtn2qrb3ykx2ZOBwwbE7w@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="8t9RHnE3ZwKMSgU+"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CALgxB7tdFsQXzGRje=suC7Yaym_Whhtn2qrb3ykx2ZOBwwbE7w@mail.gmail.com>
X-Server-Quench: d0242a85-1cea-11e5-9f74-002590a135d3
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
	http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
	aQdMdAUUEkAaAgsB AmMbWlNeU1p7Wmc7 bA5PawNDY05MQQBi
	T01BRU1TWkFtY2tT YGBaUh57fwxDNn9y Z0dgECRbXkB4JE54
	X08HQDwbZGY1bX0W BkdcagNUcgZDfk5E aVUrVz1vNG8XDSg5
	AwQ0PjZ0MThBHWx8 CjkXKkoVWksHVhU7 QggYGjAuBkBNWyJ7
	MxwrYnQYG00Sen4z I1ZpfVMdMgN6
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1024:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 74.66.142.58/587
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
	anti-virus system.
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,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] A Proposed Compromise to the Block Size Limit
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 16:37:41 -0000


--8t9RHnE3ZwKMSgU+
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 12:09:16PM -0400, Michael Naber wrote:
> The goal of Bitcoin Core is to meet the demand for global consensus as
> effectively as possible. Please let's keep the conversation on how to best
> meet that goal.

Keep in mind that Andresen and Hearn both propose that the majority of
Bitcoin users, even businesses, abandon the global consensus technology
aspect of Bitcoin - running full nodes - and instead adopt trust
technology instead - running SPV nodes.

We're very much focused on meeting the demand for global consensus
technology, but unfortunately global consensus is also has inherently
O(n^2) scaling with current approaches available. Thus we have a fixed
capacity system where access is mediated by supply and demand
transaction fees.

> The off-chain solutions you enumerate are are useful solutions in their
> respective domains, but none of them solves the global consensus problem
> with any greater efficiency than Bitcoin does.

Solutions like (hub-and-spoke) payment channels, Lightning, etc. allow
users of the global consensus technology in Bitcoin to use that
technology in much more effcient ways, leveraging a relatively small
amount of global consensus to do large numbers of transactions
trustlessly.

--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
0000000000000000007fc13ce02072d9cb2a6d51fae41fefcde7b3b283803d24

--8t9RHnE3ZwKMSgU+
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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==
=CW3S
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--8t9RHnE3ZwKMSgU+--