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
|
Return-Path: <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87CFF83D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 26 Jun 2015 17:55:30 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-la0-f52.google.com (mail-la0-f52.google.com
[209.85.215.52])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ECD037C
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 26 Jun 2015 17:55:29 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by laar3 with SMTP id r3so6231798laa.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 26 Jun 2015 10:55:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:cc:content-type;
bh=rSIfJ4rA2W8N/Lnj29XHED4tcz4kUjzCIW3lPCjQbl0=;
b=VKK3H4FS0/o2kp+5wLiO25xxqZeNLqtrWhNQSzfDu7Pt7nub+31LJi1QmPAAa0XFwy
vyajoIhrd8WMqJae2wZai15651Wgq6whDeM33KbYLXmlZXVknJvh0970jkHHickrTPDn
4zBrgPQ4lOMLoV6PQ+rAPMZLE8BcgFG4KWBA8oVM2HNkIVDPGUe1Wjb6fjk/d+o1cp48
VtGHE7uKYKazx3/ZEE8Gz3pP7cWQ3P39Cyl5Q3wtBgaUjefyTVlCjPw5YA+ywn2SP29Z
Y0WGHBsdCtWQrmWbWnonDiAo7wj9bhprssDw6RLWmyJXaarIi9ySFe6/VcMdXmFEPIKI
M7Dw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.155.103 with SMTP id vv7mr2608996lbb.75.1435341328296;
Fri, 26 Jun 2015 10:55:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.25.90.75 with HTTP; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 10:55:28 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <558D8616.7080204@thinlink.com>
References: <CAPg+sBjOj9eXiDG0F6G54SVKkStF_1HRu2wzGqtFF5X_NAWy4w@mail.gmail.com>
<558D71EF.1060603@thinlink.com> <558D7C39.6010603@mail.bihthai.net>
<558D8616.7080204@thinlink.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 13:55:28 -0400
Message-ID: <CABsx9T2ig441mX-1cV5=1eY7+0QtxqMPFXT_=S3onnTSLOM1SQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
To: Tom Harding <tomh@thinlink.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01160c0e01323f05196f7235
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
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] The need for larger blocks
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: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 17:55:30 -0000
--089e01160c0e01323f05196f7235
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
I completely agree with Pieter: usage will grow to fill whatever maximum
block size the miners decide to allow (or whatever maximum block size is
imposed by minimum transaction fees or a hard cap on block size).
I am not scared by increased usage, though: more usage and adoption means
more investment, more smart engineers, and more people with incentives to
solve whatever scaling problems crop up. All of that makes Bitcoin stronger.
And I don't feel like this process has been hurried: I've been working on
this (thinking, testing, simulating, talking, writing code, talking to key
people and companies) almost exclusively since late last year. In my humble
opinion, BIP 101 is a good compromise between "no limit, let the miners
decide" and "lower the max size so a raspberry pi running on a 56K modem
can be a full node."
--
--
Gavin Andresen
--089e01160c0e01323f05196f7235
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">I completely agree with Pieter: usage will grow to fill wh=
atever maximum block size the miners decide to allow (or whatever maximum b=
lock size is imposed by minimum transaction fees or a hard cap on block siz=
e).<div><br></div><div>I am not scared by increased usage, though: more usa=
ge and adoption means more investment, more smart engineers, and more peopl=
e with incentives to solve whatever scaling problems crop up. All of that m=
akes Bitcoin stronger.</div><div><br></div><div>And I don't feel like t=
his process has been hurried: I've been working on this (thinking, test=
ing, simulating, talking, writing code, talking to key people and companies=
) almost exclusively since late last year. In my humble opinion, BIP 101 is=
a good compromise between "no limit, let the miners decide" and =
"lower the max size so a raspberry pi running on a 56K modem can be a =
full node."</div><div><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div><br></=
div>-- <br><div class=3D"gmail_signature">--<br>Gavin Andresen<br></div>
</div></div>
--089e01160c0e01323f05196f7235--
|
