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
|
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <jgarzik@bitpay.com>) id 1X88Sl-0007KU-OE
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 18 Jul 2014 13:44:39 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bitpay.com
designates 74.125.82.172 as permitted sender)
client-ip=74.125.82.172; envelope-from=jgarzik@bitpay.com;
helo=mail-we0-f172.google.com;
Received: from mail-we0-f172.google.com ([74.125.82.172])
by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1X88Sh-0006C1-1A
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 18 Jul 2014 13:44:39 +0000
Received: by mail-we0-f172.google.com with SMTP id x48so4533677wes.17
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Fri, 18 Jul 2014 06:44:27 -0700 (PDT)
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:from:date
:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type;
bh=AenjdEdC/QOWd3+/P4XwQki9zPc/oUbqhNMLYPESP8E=;
b=I7/6hOE/w4uPqhX6jlGOAoV5h9hpVGUTFO/7vA8csrocsi2bmD174SDxZ8qbykLC3K
+z5lCx1ap4wooQM+s20GQ09MNMH4VZw172hGh9tvUKqJ1T+DGEzGGToJkRJETdjD7wq+
SmM74pZcHZh8h0lkwbXNjEpCFM9BCN5YbBIr6D3WyszJ5NVxB7NVvwRfnIt8wStFsoHg
QzUJaXRZdC/KpReQU0fioNQRGin3SrIqJfVGzc9C6Wr60SYR3TnZRqNlmtmvj3IwQ5CY
Khjv6rU2g25nZW0G9pRTmDb+xvdk2561YOaaONF6TeY0d6ncJ5urWAbYWWrwSP4It0X7
GRcA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmwVkJdLovnffo1KXYzXaWWIG0/egJddoF/6RX7A+JG1pQ1NZFFw/Z5Ru8x2LzrNvinENpu
X-Received: by 10.181.11.232 with SMTP id el8mr7941795wid.57.1405691067089;
Fri, 18 Jul 2014 06:44:27 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.194.5.67 with HTTP; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 06:44:07 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP2+tufB0jbgqdCc9t_XLbs9pnX9t8jUGfLA_xLDhEts8Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJHLa0PWF38N0-CFY9b3FzFdN2NfLduWHCeCQHXQOKirDYn0Pw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAJna-HhhqYGSVwapvR_5yvRY3gc6wXGaNXm_dkP4Tid7F1SsLw@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP0HxfJYaTxYdxh3ANLOMma_J9A93A0LjB47PHdiaNo5NA@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP2+tufB0jbgqdCc9t_XLbs9pnX9t8jUGfLA_xLDhEts8Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 09:44:07 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJHLa0PZsTjB7O_JuPsMUzfrWAB9yW+x0bEKWo3JyGebKr42ZA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1X88Sh-0006C1-1A
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Decentralizing ming
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 13:44:39 -0000
Yes. That, and several other things. If you can figure out how to
propagate a block without re-propagating all the transactions everyone
already has, you address the large-blocks-slower-to-relay problem, and
additionally create an incentive for miners to mine blocks consisting
of publicly broadcast transactions (versus a bunch of secret ones
mined with secret agreements).
Democratizing transaction selection takes a bit of power away from the
miners and gives it back to the network at large. GBT is another
piece of that puzzle.
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 6:43 AM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:
> Oops, sorry, I see the subject line changed. This is what I get for working
> down the thread list top to bottom :)
>
> I think the best path forward now is to finish off getblocktemplate support
> in the various tools so it's possible to pool for payout purposes without
> giving up control of block creation modulo the coinbase. Combined with the
> recent sipa performance enhancing goodness, it would hopefully persuade some
> non-trivial chunk of hashpower to go back to running their own node and
> start the process of turning pools merely into payout trackers rather than
> block selectors.
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:
>>
>> Jeff, I think the message you're replying to got clipped.
>>
>> Satoshi's only comment AFAIK on the topic of GPU mining was to wish for a
>> gentlemen's agreement to postpone it as long as possible, to help make sure
>> the distribution of coins was as even as possible. Indeed this predated
>> pooled mining.
>>
>
--
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/
|
