summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/90/c043b7b7010ab9aca9c687bd377cf61655925d
blob: cd2bd0781a7fcd2b3c8320f10704ab84424b132c (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
Return-Path: <milly@bitcoins.info>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C556516A0
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Fri,  2 Oct 2015 23:19:27 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail.help.org (mail.help.org [70.90.2.18])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 458FD1AA
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Fri,  2 Oct 2015 23:19:27 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [10.1.10.25] (B [10.1.10.25]) by mail.help.org with ESMTPA
	; Fri, 2 Oct 2015 19:19:23 -0400
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
References: <CAEgR2PFQtr78B3t147=3Ko4VnTGevb0QCySk=hDSqeFHZk=MPQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<201510022131.22411.luke@dashjr.org>
From: Milly Bitcoin <milly@bitcoins.info>
Message-ID: <560F10EF.8020906@bitcoins.info>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 19:19:11 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
	Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <201510022131.22411.luke@dashjr.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
	smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Dev-list's stance on potentially altering the PoW
 algorithm
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, 02 Oct 2015 23:19:27 -0000

> Restarting the mining with a new algorithm as a reaction and defence against
> centralised hoarding of mining ASICs (as we are seeing now), would be
> acceptable. It would not necessarily be contentions *to the economy*, as such
> hoarding-miners do not participate in the economy in any meaningful way (they
> do not accept payments from other bitcoin users).
>
> Luke

I don't see any basis for these claims.  Under this theory developers 
also do not "participate in the economy" either.  These are questions 
for economists and not developers.

Maybe "we" could change the language of Core to prevent the 
centralization of developers?  Maybe switch over to FORTRAN?   lol

Russ