summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/64/9d8ef901e489a7cda4d740c7afebeaf15c0a98
blob: a659c015dc1ae86298a1aef87c0079618fd0d43f (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
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 D2F42FA0
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sat, 19 Dec 2015 17:43:18 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from outmail148111.authsmtp.net (outmail148111.authsmtp.net
	[62.13.148.111])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2502D141
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sat, 19 Dec 2015 17:43:17 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-c232.authsmtp.com (mail-c232.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.232])
	by punt23.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id tBJHhGh0007487;
	Sat, 19 Dec 2015 17:43:16 GMT
Received: from muck ([24.114.24.241]) (authenticated bits=128)
	by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id tBJHhAb0037868
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
	Sat, 19 Dec 2015 17:43:15 GMT
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 09:43:10 -0800
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: jl2012 <jl2012@xbt.hk>
Message-ID: <20151219174309.GB30640@muck>
References: <b19eb676c18ba451605cb02159541dd9@xbt.hk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="nVMJ2NtxeReIH9PS"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <b19eb676c18ba451605cb02159541dd9@xbt.hk>
X-Server-Quench: fbe18f26-a677-11e5-829e-00151795d556
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
	http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
	aAdMdwsUHFAXAgsB AmMbWlNeVF57WGU7 aQ5PbARZfEhKQQdu
	UVdMSlVNFUssc2Z5 Xm9MUhlxcA1AcDB0 Z0RmECYJCUVyI0R7
	Xx9SEmobZGY1bX0X UkkNagNUcQZLeRZA PlV6Uj1vNG8XDSg5
	AwQ0PjZ0MThBHWxu Tw4XIF0bXUsHViE9 WxYPBi5nBkoLWys0
	NR9uNV8AHA4UNUk/ K1I9VBoRPxgKFgxZ GSMFACZCb0cMXTtj
	FgZTWUpWGjlaSiQU GRw6L1dFDDJfUTYw 
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1037:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 24.114.24.241/587
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] Segregated witness softfork with moderate
 adoption has very small block size effect
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, 19 Dec 2015 17:43:18 -0000


--nVMJ2NtxeReIH9PS
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 11:49:25AM -0500, jl2012 via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> I have done some calculation for the effect of a SW softfork on the
> actual total block size.

Note how the fact that segwit needs client-side adoption to enable an
actual blocksize increase can be a good thing: it's a clear sign that
the ecosystem as a whole has opted-into a blocksize increase.

Not as good as a direct proof-of-stake vote, and somewhat coercive as a
vote as you pay lower fees, but it's an interesting side-effect.

--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
00000000000000000188b6321da7feae60d74c7b0becbdab3b1a0bd57f10947d

--nVMJ2NtxeReIH9PS
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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==
=aFh2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nVMJ2NtxeReIH9PS--