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
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
|
Return-Path: <ibrightly@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BE33273
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 28 Jun 2015 14:22:27 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-ob0-f171.google.com (mail-ob0-f171.google.com
[209.85.214.171])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E111D155
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 28 Jun 2015 14:22:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by obbkm3 with SMTP id km3so90992463obb.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 28 Jun 2015 07:22:26 -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=wzgDztP5Fpke5DLcB0cXFSRPihJp2YNucV3yx87U1ww=;
b=wxC24zNqRamAT5tfIHSOhoNNnJh1Di/kcV+Ea+FbhSg+8yZrmowI/bMuiy7QeWlH+f
YLZ9Muo/ZW3D7uXq8Sn5S86VnGmZUwQ2qoKaTPvRFOmw0Z8n1/IidS6DptVU4t4zItaC
6e9Opf9HGz9G9jh5s3x+JyvRnyjpvebAunU9QRo58kaMz+SCU4Mr2agVjfl5AYG27UwF
BQrha7CoUu4tOh2/jG+PkwroNzzyu4JguAWAalQoUUo68GndFlWo9tpADLvOiGpx9bZ3
TJJ1SGaJczkGlr52XtQo2hr5hqLpTSsnLL5xtTU2GSw4/9LYgi314j1w1A6kHWWso5y+
YQlw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.202.81.151 with SMTP id f145mr9449076oib.29.1435501346332;
Sun, 28 Jun 2015 07:22:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.76.177.164 with HTTP; Sun, 28 Jun 2015 07:22:26 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <21CECA63-6993-47F9-B963-A1075C45A268@gmail.com>
References: <CAPg+sBjOj9eXiDG0F6G54SVKkStF_1HRu2wzGqtFF5X_NAWy4w@mail.gmail.com>
<20150627074259.GA25420@amethyst.visucore.com>
<20150627095501.C59B541A40@smtp.hushmail.com>
<20150627100400.GC25420@amethyst.visucore.com>
<20150627102912.06E2641A3E@smtp.hushmail.com>
<CABm2gDpnzjph5SKTf+8GWgwe+njS=k2GNm9uL73RC-EV=Y5wug@mail.gmail.com>
<20150627121016.2360041A3E@smtp.hushmail.com>
<CABm2gDovynxmZmf_voz-19mmb5k0R4Snxcucx-WObt_stkAL9A@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAre=ySbA-JaAZoU1AsGHTZoYOwkeiRnfkYPjMV6yEa_r+SYKA@mail.gmail.com>
<21CECA63-6993-47F9-B963-A1075C45A268@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2015 10:22:26 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAre=ySNL35TTuxjqkTmEjQi-HxCr35OgvM+sjyG9O3Z9nK_Qw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ivan Brightly <ibrightly@gmail.com>
To: Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113ab4e8d2a797051994b3d0
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, URIBL_BLACK autolearn=no 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: Sun, 28 Jun 2015 14:22:27 -0000
--001a113ab4e8d2a797051994b3d0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Agreed on both accounts. The main point is that there are no inherent
rights built into bitcoin - just aligned economic interests enforced by
agreed upon technical rules. The technical rules allow for a majority to
dictate, while the economic interests may or may not support such a change.
On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com> wrote=
:
> Furthermore, the actual way in which the conflict is resolved sets a
> precedent for how such disagreements are to be =E2=80=9Cresolved=E2=80=9D=
in the future.
>
> So the means are also important to consider.
>
> - Eric
>
> On Jun 28, 2015, at 6:51 AM, Ivan Brightly <ibrightly@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 8:13 AM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <jtimon@jtimon.cc> wrot=
e:
>
>>
>> No, this is very important. The majority has no right to dictate on
>> the minority.
>>
>
> While an interesting philosophical question, I don't think that this is
> accurate. First off, bitcoin doesn't imbue any 'rights' on individuals -
> it provides the choice of participating or not, nothing more.
>
> Secondly, from a technical perspective, how is it that the majority (or
> super-majority) are prevented from imposing their will? The best answer i=
s
> that they are incentivized to not override a minority group since that
> reduces the inherent value in the system. However, presuming that the
> majority calculate that the reward for imposing a change is greater than
> the value lost in such disruption, I don't see how there would be any
> stopping this change. The longest chain with the greatest number of users
> valuing the token on that chain "wins".
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>
>
--001a113ab4e8d2a797051994b3d0
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">Agreed on both accounts. The main point is that there are =
no inherent rights built into bitcoin - just aligned economic interests enf=
orced by agreed upon technical rules. The technical rules allow for a major=
ity to dictate, while the economic interests may or may not support such a =
change.</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On S=
un, Jun 28, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Eric Lombrozo <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=
=3D"mailto:elombrozo@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">elombrozo@gmail.com</a>&g=
t;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0=
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style=3D"word-wrap:=
break-word">Furthermore, the actual way in which the conflict is resolved s=
ets a precedent for how such disagreements are to be =E2=80=9Cresolved=E2=
=80=9D in the future.<div><br></div><div>So the means are also important to=
consider.</div><div><br></div><div>- Eric</div><div><br></div><div><div><b=
lockquote type=3D"cite"><div>On Jun 28, 2015, at 6:51 AM, Ivan Brightly <=
;<a href=3D"mailto:ibrightly@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">ibrightly@gmail.c=
om</a>> wrote:</div><br><div><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"=
><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 8:13 AM, Jorge Tim=C3=
=B3n <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:jtimon@jtimon.cc" target=3D"_b=
lank">jtimon@jtimon.cc</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_=
quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1=
ex"><br>
No, this is very important. The majority has no right to dictate on<br>
the minority.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>While an interesting phil=
osophical question, I don't think that this is accurate. First off, bit=
coin doesn't imbue =C2=A0any 'rights' on individuals - it provi=
des the choice of participating or not, nothing more.</div><div><br></div><=
div>Secondly, from a technical perspective, how is it that the majority (or=
super-majority) are prevented from imposing their will? The best answer is=
that they are incentivized to not override a minority group since that red=
uces the inherent value in the system. However, presuming that the majority=
calculate that the reward for imposing a change is greater than the value =
lost in such disruption, I don't see how there would be any stopping th=
is change. The longest chain with the greatest number of users valuing the =
token on that chain "wins".</div></div><br></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>bitcoin-dev mailing list=
<br><a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_bla=
nk">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br><a href=3D"https://lists.l=
inuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" target=3D"_blank">https://=
lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br></div></block=
quote></div><br></div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
--001a113ab4e8d2a797051994b3d0--
|
