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
|
Return-Path: <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 605241135
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 26 Dec 2015 17:20:24 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-vk0-f53.google.com (mail-vk0-f53.google.com
[209.85.213.53])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C4F08EC
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 26 Dec 2015 17:20:23 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-vk0-f53.google.com with SMTP id a123so6256931vkh.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 26 Dec 2015 09:20:23 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=jtimon-cc.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:cc:content-type;
bh=5DEkxHYDnLhjVXpkOS1tVWfzzpou8lEzDGyK8anN4dk=;
b=Z9jSF51mxsNBKgedihfONY7QuTx0viYXsDFa/kUKzTDdaENwphs/Nr9cfgtT7zVPJ5
7qzAlpe8Bl8hQvK3gzAAiR5iz/rzc1CESO3v76B2qMlTuVMkpwQjXuA7Vyw2QLXD4+O7
0IOee3OOCmBZs8qnsluyJVfM3UoBjQyhSdYZS5P4bM1mheiWfYTQl6illL8y6/sP9q3/
pNf5s1mDavu/BCbAa6fEvS96bCmicOgXysToEzBE9I7brfErYE9PycA0S1g+tD2Xetqi
3ZyFcDvl3yok/D/pmS5xNLSoz/JSNdlgfvUhKVri63kW1OVm+TPsKkHuW5fYkXcPBOCk
NrDA==
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:date
:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
bh=5DEkxHYDnLhjVXpkOS1tVWfzzpou8lEzDGyK8anN4dk=;
b=dyEOFcb1GiTFzR34qRLmAa9zIm1AMbVQL70xdelBQxTfCsD+lqIr5Kb0Ads6fW8hYu
3zDijGTLT7j56jsRba/uTkh9AwVZvByBzzbdpQaWa5+tQe3GxYCWBptp85/UcOn0vV0C
ms93p496vwjwrvq8ZY3m99oo+s/l4YoZxNKzuQN5mYR4aHbEWmRm6CVPTkdlkMrPnbfW
aZ9IPSgMz6Recly1PSGWH8P2Gqyiui0/64VRyC8Tw0QGojAdufzfRbyhi1qjNWkeNRFP
/nI4OSuLI2GJrnHD7onmwklIt0VTl9rM0U4rLZNGbRixvUgAgnHAsSMuCd5GjNTSM5Gj
9wRw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlmWbmIGt8JWUSH1t5k9YMDMEZ7I1r9nYCbdlubMSeipA27kBXgqgFXeDqfHI8O8oLYQgrd44LqjiOGOsaYu+TqDFhmXA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.31.170.149 with SMTP id t143mr27099398vke.63.1451150422786;
Sat, 26 Dec 2015 09:20:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.31.141.73 with HTTP; Sat, 26 Dec 2015 09:20:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.31.141.73 with HTTP; Sat, 26 Dec 2015 09:20:22 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAPg+sBiT5=ss9e=iac6J-A=85okF0zxMeV7H4z9-Qfx3CAWHXA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADm_WcasDuBsop55ZWcTb2FvccaoREg8K032rUjgQUQhQ3g=XA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAPg+sBi=Mw7UnxG1-0-0ZTRqxrS5+28VmowyYrGP2MAvYiu_pA@mail.gmail.com>
<CADm_WcbrMyk-=OnQ-3UvnF_8brhn+X2NqRPbo5xUXsbcZpc0=Q@mail.gmail.com>
<CAPg+sBjbATqf8DXGF7obw9a=371zQ_S0EgTapnUmukAVenTneQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+c4Zozac8=aMrAJ1N_6SR9eBD+w0e70cEnk9CG_2oZ72AS-8g@mail.gmail.com>
<CAPg+sBhsKD8jd9Y9+ngXY5tKUheO3d4P1b47eYL=Uzpat+KJ2w@mail.gmail.com>
<751DFAA9-9013-4C54-BC1E-5F7ECB7469CC@gmail.com>
<CAPg+sBiT5=ss9e=iac6J-A=85okF0zxMeV7H4z9-Qfx3CAWHXA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2015 18:20:22 +0100
Message-ID: <CABm2gDrpi=26o57-JHPbN5EPE9WKXO2bsqLv=aYHLtAO5y4WMA@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
To: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114326c6775be90527d0494a
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,HTML_MESSAGE,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 <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
digitsu <jerry.d.chan@bittoku.co.jp>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Block size: It's economics & user preparation &
moral hazard
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, 26 Dec 2015 17:20:24 -0000
--001a114326c6775be90527d0494a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Dec 26, 2015 5:45 PM, "Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> My opinion is that the role of Bitcoin Core maintainers is judging
whether consensus for a hard fork exists, and is technically necessary and
safe. We don't need a hashpower vote to decide whether a hardfork is
accepted or not, we need to be sure that full noded will accept it, and
adopt it in time. A hashpower vote can still be used to be sure that miners
_also_ agree.
To clarify, that's the role of Bitcoin Core maintainers because they decide
what goes into Bitcoin Core, not because they decide the consensus rules of
Bitcoin. Other full node implementations (say, libbitcoin) will have to
decide on their own and Bitcoin Core mainteiners don't have any authority
over libbitcoin (or other alternative implementations). Nobody has such
authority (not even the creator of the system if he was still maintaining
Bitcoin Core).
--001a114326c6775be90527d0494a
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<p dir=3D"ltr"><br>
On Dec 26, 2015 5:45 PM, "Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev" <<a h=
ref=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linu=
xfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<br>
> My opinion is that the role of Bitcoin Core maintainers is judging whe=
ther consensus for a hard fork exists, and is technically necessary and saf=
e. We don't need a hashpower vote to decide whether a hardfork is accep=
ted or not, we need to be sure that full noded will accept it, and adopt it=
in time. A hashpower vote can still be used to be sure that miners _also_ =
agree.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">To clarify, that's the role of Bitcoin Core maintainers =
because they decide what goes into Bitcoin Core, not because they decide th=
e consensus rules of Bitcoin. Other full node implementations (say, libbitc=
oin) will have to decide on their own and Bitcoin Core mainteiners don'=
t have any authority over libbitcoin (or other alternative implementations)=
. Nobody has such authority (not even the creator of the system if he was s=
till maintaining Bitcoin Core).</p>
--001a114326c6775be90527d0494a--
|
