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
|
Return-Path: <mickeybob@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ABAE4BBF
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 30 Jun 2015 15:34:35 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wi0-f180.google.com (mail-wi0-f180.google.com
[209.85.212.180])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 146B0E9
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 30 Jun 2015 15:34:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wiar9 with SMTP id r9so40587970wia.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 30 Jun 2015 08:34:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
bh=jTLEYatMaQ8R14HqTNoIjhIFblxrUN3exagyiuQxRog=;
b=n1iGGhduZUI38pOfIhKWjE9KHNmmHkeHq6OolQAXZ0FlpXrPh5N9fFY/071rem7LzV
GbPSyXocnDWMt9IY51QOkUxkeZ62n53IqzS7ZW93/8Ek+jZaOLQ3DIBi9lGxJrVyi+WH
oLzkrNt4a814NvoKNkJenvWS+jJay/wk7yS0H5nsePnUcHWGRQwn2assV31GWTQ2kkjo
aGmbZ1yr8XnFko1y2a4Zxla8X4LbUW+zNB79TtkBbNiHvlSTtEF+m94bvHsdXwPlWjXw
sPeGRW/St7KSq+obvQeeqasAAf+VzpzPsqs9X+NvWCtAMUycNVJjELFXNQegdoiErDSk
hovQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.87.105 with SMTP id w9mr34682315wiz.32.1435678473374;
Tue, 30 Jun 2015 08:34:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.27.10.1 with HTTP; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 08:34:33 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 11:34:33 -0400
Message-ID: <CALgxB7uvtKCNM-nH+aqqPa4KNf5O6Gx4GmgZY7Oq8=A24wCrfA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Michael Naber <mickeybob@gmail.com>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d044401986ad4c10519bdf14f
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,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
Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Block size increase oppositionists: please clearly
define what you need done to increase block size to a static 8MB,
and help do it
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: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 15:34:35 -0000
--f46d044401986ad4c10519bdf14f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
As you know I'm trying to lobby for a block size increase to a static 8MB.
I'm happy to try to get the testing done that people want done for this,
but I think the real crux of this issue is that we need to get consensus
that we intend to continually push the block size upward as bounded only by
technology.
Imagine an engineer (Gavin) at Boeing (Bitcoin Core) said he was going to
build an airplane (block) that was going to move 8x as many people
(transactions) as today=E2=80=99s planes (blocks), all while costing about =
the same
amount to operate. Imagine he then went on to tell you that he expects to
double the plane=E2=80=99s (block's) capacity every two years!
Without full planes (blocks), will the airlines (miners) go out of
business, since planes (blocks) will never be full and the cost to add
people (transactions) to a plane (block) will approach zero? Probably not.
Airlines (miners) still have to pay for pilots, security screening staff,
fuel, etc (engineers, hash rate, electricity, etc) so even if their
airplanes (blocks) can hold limitless people (transactions), they would
still have to charge sufficient fees to stay in business.
What tests do you need done to move to 8MB? Pitch in and help get those
tests done; agree that we'll run more tests next year or the year after
when technology might allow for 16 MB blocks. Do you really want to be the
guy holding back bigger planes? Do you really want to artificially
constrain block size below what technology allows?
In the face of such strong market demand for increased capacity in globally
aware global consensus, do you really think you can prevent supply from
meeting demand when the technology exists to deliver it? Do you really want
to force a fork because you and others won't agree to a simple raise to a
static 8MB?
Do what's best for Bitcoin and define what needs to get done to agree to a
simple block size increase to a static 8MB.
--f46d044401986ad4c10519bdf14f
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">As you know I'm trying to lobby for a block size incre=
ase to a static 8MB.=C2=A0<div><br></div><div>I'm happy to try to get t=
he testing done that people want done for this, but I think the real crux o=
f this issue is that we need to get consensus that we intend to continually=
push the block size upward as bounded only by technology.</div><div><br></=
div><div><div>Imagine an engineer (Gavin) at Boeing (Bitcoin Core) said he =
was going to build an airplane (block) that was going to move 8x as many pe=
ople (transactions) as today=E2=80=99s planes (blocks), all while costing a=
bout the same amount to operate. Imagine he then went on to tell you that h=
e expects to double the plane=E2=80=99s (block's) capacity every two ye=
ars!=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div>Without full planes (blocks), will the =
airlines (miners) go out of business, since planes (blocks) will never be f=
ull and the cost to add people (transactions) to a plane (block) will appro=
ach zero? Probably not. Airlines (miners) still have to pay for pilots, sec=
urity screening staff, fuel, etc (engineers, hash rate, electricity, etc) s=
o even if their airplanes (blocks) can hold limitless people (transactions)=
, they would still have to charge sufficient fees to stay in business.</div=
><div><br></div></div><div>What tests do you need done to move to 8MB? Pitc=
h in and help get those tests done; agree that we'll run more tests nex=
t year or the year after when technology might allow for 16 MB blocks. Do y=
ou really want to be the guy holding back bigger planes? Do you really want=
to artificially constrain block size below what technology allows?=C2=A0</=
div><div><br></div><div>In the face of such strong market demand for increa=
sed capacity in globally aware global consensus, do you really think you ca=
n prevent supply from meeting demand when the technology exists to deliver =
it? Do you really want to force a fork because you and others won't agr=
ee to a simple raise to a static 8MB?=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div>Do wha=
t's best for Bitcoin and define what needs to get done to agree to a si=
mple block size increase to a static 8MB.</div></div>
--f46d044401986ad4c10519bdf14f--
|
