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
|
Return-Path: <bram@bittorrent.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9289DB77
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 10 Apr 2017 14:46:39 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-io0-f177.google.com (mail-io0-f177.google.com
[209.85.223.177])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 43BE01E6
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 10 Apr 2017 14:46:38 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-io0-f177.google.com with SMTP id a103so33436087ioj.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 10 Apr 2017 07:46:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=bittorrent-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc; bh=LrJDJnxR/EL9W+YxJuSxh9kpTzTKW7JLDFp1Jcr6IyQ=;
b=ZDD+mGvNg3OI4UYbwej+oOdHKcs5y1kbyOJnHuCqvBHlqSYCVMU2aCcYlarXNfWaBt
VodWGuxtYCaiaJlS665u48voyXNk9+TaYAKoXCpetFoFbDKvW9WuPI5kHzdW0fUVLx2F
384THjYj+oiLSTVlfzI13BsXQaClsyzXK4HOKCfjH6JhW806/tpKapkK6XUfTRHBiQE3
c+S/1lGw79yjALJG1fn23lYWpL105Yt7FUxhA4yv3giXy/GkWbl5qb3vpjJjctPMGTTw
jRpa7Dp6h3CGg/Z4S4dM9Nsa/S9LQgkLVhrtkeqmAtuWu/YxJFFvtdK++xcJdPsOf7ql
LlwA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
:message-id:subject:to:cc;
bh=LrJDJnxR/EL9W+YxJuSxh9kpTzTKW7JLDFp1Jcr6IyQ=;
b=h7g9cybWRPO958AeHsb40t2I0OF+U5GRFo4VKSYqmyD5D2q78KO6f5ZRLTddxSBFz2
IINWGB80Aei5q42Y9fEuO4i87JlHxIxMAGoXsNfZV2JNmUeZwtQgikiZoN1Tgfg3Y8j+
a6Z9qSqtfaK5BVRoVu92rFpGd0YP4SLdSdlpqOIrGDKsq1IQwxxMSIDceA4EfcnW7QG0
jVpzCISmsj/cvaZg99umj3lK3Y24X6Tyto2rxU+hNOnA89OtGx21CRUXKpRJWU63UnBP
SEcd3XEdRjrE6YCfpnN5OiNdSxxVFa01LrMe+yYNIp3ku3o5b3faDeI5ppVmZz2Xm6Vr
AiJg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/4L0+DyvNVvIUv889/mh8+wAPW+nRmwnPijcf2xDUjpYC5xlYE40Xml1Ygh+Ufkm0NPAZULFTTsRpSAESFz
X-Received: by 10.107.164.106 with SMTP id n103mr1977819ioe.103.1491835596308;
Mon, 10 Apr 2017 07:46:36 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.36.202.193 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Apr 2017 07:46:35 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAJowKg+tYK9j5LTwokMGutD+-SjBQ70U=X7rqHMGSeaG2NEo9A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJR7vkpRhNsQsem-nFkeubX04xx1y7aHwCENfg0d1266oOsXMw@mail.gmail.com>
<Cwhn7YzwaDUZtOygDAgrU1UXjRPG-EiH3Fyz2c95gqOpNnNbiYL1NvhS28yK5wLJCnIqDaBrM6c574dY-O6_-bRjLIFmDe2NCxIuyV1w2dw=@protonmail.com>
<CAJowKg+tYK9j5LTwokMGutD+-SjBQ70U=X7rqHMGSeaG2NEo9A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Bram Cohen <bram@bittorrent.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2017 07:46:35 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+KqGkqk12O6KmzBwgoXQTo6GgR08rff0XTJ0OfsCjKfnBEhGQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Erik Aronesty <erik@q32.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11421b38c81a22054cd10aec
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,
RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=no version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] A Small Modification to Segwit
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol 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: Mon, 10 Apr 2017 14:46:39 -0000
--001a11421b38c81a22054cd10aec
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 11:44 AM, Erik Aronesty via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> Perhaps regular, high-consensus POW changes might even be *necessary* as a
> part of good maintenance of cryptocurrency in general. Killing the
> existing POW, and using an as-yet undefined, but deployment-bit ready POW
> field to flip-flop between the current and the "next one" every 8 years or
> or so, with a ramp down beginning in the 7th year.... A stub function that
> is guaranteed to fail unless a new consensus POW is selected within 7
> years.
>
That would force hard forks, cause huge governance problems on selecting
the new PoW algorithm, and probably cause even worse mining chip
manufacturer centralization because it would force miners to buy new chips
instead of sticking with the ones they've already got. They'll likely have
to keep buying new ones anyway as technology improves but it doesn't help
to force that process to go even faster.
--001a11421b38c81a22054cd10aec
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 S=
un, Apr 9, 2017 at 11:44 AM, Erik Aronesty via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr=
"><<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_b=
lank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><block=
quote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc=
solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><br></div><div>Perhaps regul=
ar, high-consensus POW changes might even be *necessary* as a part of good =
maintenance of cryptocurrency in general. =C2=A0 Killing the existing POW, =
and using an as-yet undefined, but deployment-bit ready POW field to flip-f=
lop between the current and the "next one" every 8 years or or so=
, with a ramp down beginning in the 7th year....=C2=A0 A stub function that=
is guaranteed to fail unless a new consensus POW is selected within 7 year=
s. =C2=A0 <br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>That would force=
hard forks, cause huge governance problems on selecting the new PoW algori=
thm, and probably cause even worse mining chip manufacturer centralization =
because it would force miners to buy new chips instead of sticking with the=
ones they've already got. They'll likely have to keep buying new o=
nes anyway as technology improves but it doesn't help to force that pro=
cess to go even faster.</div></div></div></div>
--001a11421b38c81a22054cd10aec--
|
