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
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <sergiolerner@certimix.com>) id 1YsFKm-0008S7-BQ
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 12 May 2015 18:55:16 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from p3plsmtpa09-02.prod.phx3.secureserver.net ([173.201.193.231])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1YsFKk-0003gw-JX
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 12 May 2015 18:55:16 +0000
Received: from [192.168.0.23] ([190.17.195.187])
by p3plsmtpa09-02.prod.phx3.secureserver.net with
id T6v51q00b433uHa016v79e; Tue, 12 May 2015 11:55:08 -0700
Message-ID: <55524C89.6080705@certimix.com>
Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 15:55:05 -0300
From: Sergio Lerner <sergiolerner@certimix.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Leo Wandersleb <leo@LeoWandersleb.de>,
"bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net"
<bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
References: <55505441.3010906@certimix.com> <5551021E.8010706@LeoWandersleb.de>
In-Reply-To: <5551021E.8010706@LeoWandersleb.de>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------------070607090009000509010008"
X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust [173.201.193.231 listed in list.dnswl.org]
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
X-Headers-End: 1YsFKk-0003gw-JX
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Reducing the block rate instead of
increasing the maximum block size
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: Tue, 12 May 2015 18:55:16 -0000
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------070607090009000509010008
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On 11/05/2015 04:25 p.m., Leo Wandersleb wrote:
> I assume that 1 minute block target will not get any substantial support but
> just in case only few people speaking up might be taken as careful
support of
> the idea, here's my two cents:
>
> In mining, stale shares depend on delay between pool/network and the
miner. This
> varies substantially globally and as Peter Todd/Luke-Jr mentioned,
speed of
> light will always keep those at a disadvantage that are 100 light
milli seconds
> away from the creation of the last block. If anything, this warrants
to increase
> block target, not reduce. (The increase might wait until we have
miners on Mars
> though ;) )
An additional delay of 200 milliseconds means loosing approximately 0.3%
of the revenue.
Do you really think this is going to be the key factor to prevent a
mining pool from being used?
There are lot of other factors, such as DoS protections, security,
privacy, variance, trust, algorithm to distribute shares, that are much
more important than that.
And having a 1 minute block actually reduces the payout variance 10x, so
miners will be happy for that. And many pool miners may opt to do solo
mining, and create new full-nodes.
>
>
> If SPV also becomes 10 times more traffic intensive, I can only urge
you to
> travel to anything but central Europe or the USA.
The SPV traffic is minuscule. Bloom-filers are an ugly solution that
increases bandwidth and does not provide a real privacy solution.
Small improvements in the wire protocol can reduce the traffic two-fold.
>
>
> I want bitcoin to be the currency for the other x billion and thus I
oppose any
> change that moves the balance towards the economically upper billion.
Because having a 10 minute rate Bitcoin is a good Internet money. If you
have a 1 minute rate, then it can also be a retail payment method, an
virtual game trading payment method, a gambling, XXX-video renting
(hey, it takes less than 10 minutes to see one of those :), and much more.
You can reach more billions by having near instant payments.
Don't tell me about the morning caffe, I would like that everyone is
buying their coffe with Bitcoin and there are millions of users before
we figure out how to do that off-chain.
Best regards,
Sergio.
--------------070607090009000509010008
Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
On 11/05/2015 04:25 p.m., Leo Wandersleb wrote:<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">> I assume that 1 minute block
target will not get any substantial support but<br>
> just in case only few people speaking up might be taken as
careful support of<br>
> the idea, here's my two cents:<br>
><br>
> In mining, stale shares depend on delay between pool/network
and the miner. This<br>
> varies substantially globally and as Peter Todd/Luke-Jr
mentioned, speed of<br>
> light will always keep those at a disadvantage that are 100
light milli seconds<br>
> away from the creation of the last block. If anything, this
warrants to increase<br>
> block target, not reduce. (The increase might wait until we
have miners on Mars<br>
> though ;) )</span><br>
<br>
An additional delay of 200 milliseconds means loosing approximately
0.3% of the revenue.<br>
Do you really think this is going to be the key factor to prevent a
mining pool from being used?<br>
There are lot of other factors, such as DoS protections, security,
privacy, variance, trust, algorithm to distribute shares, that are
much more important than that.<br>
<br>
And having a 1 minute block actually reduces the payout variance
10x, so miners will be happy for that. And many pool miners may opt
to do solo mining, and create new full-nodes.<br>
<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">><br>
><br>
> If SPV also becomes 10 times more traffic intensive, I can
only urge you to<br>
> travel to anything but central Europe or the USA.</span><br>
The SPV traffic is minuscule. Bloom-filers are an ugly solution that
increases bandwidth and does not provide a real privacy solution.<br>
Small improvements in the wire protocol can reduce the traffic
two-fold.<br>
<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">><br>
><br>
> I want bitcoin to be the currency for the other x billion and
thus I oppose any<br>
> change that moves the balance towards the economically upper
billion.</span><br>
Because having a 10 minute rate Bitcoin is a good Internet money. If
you have a 1 minute rate, then it can also be a retail payment
method, an virtual game trading payment method, a gambling,
XXX-video renting (hey, it takes less than 10 minutes to see one of
those :), and much more.<br>
<br>
You can reach more billions by having near instant payments.<br>
Don't tell me about the morning caffe, I would like that everyone is
buying their coffe with Bitcoin and there are millions of users
before we figure out how to do that off-chain.<br>
<br>
Best regards,<br>
Sergio.<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>
--------------070607090009000509010008--
|
