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
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
|
Return-Path: <andrew.johnson83@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 642D1CD4
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 8 Feb 2017 19:56:21 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-vk0-f48.google.com (mail-vk0-f48.google.com
[209.85.213.48])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78F0D247
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 8 Feb 2017 19:56:20 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-vk0-f48.google.com with SMTP id x75so108823971vke.2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 08 Feb 2017 11:56:20 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc; bh=gz8pcR25vzBz21zA2XmNQSrCavRt6QD8AEEKy+auesQ=;
b=vhenIgwo8AQ/oCicJSjuG/9ULkVgT2MngUhCowIevwiCr1+FxvUdiyaIu+MwbaDh7W
vFBc7dvToKEj8gb+Tp/fabpBr64dFsAF4ZKE5pxYdx+i4zHwkW+jPrC279898nxC5+9R
axz90wsP6tmjmWZ3+Dfx2WT3XrnW/K5jGuaEmqYISL6wiSjho8Eu2m1Lxzxcpsxx8Qme
iD1gTU162AQID/7diV3ghpyFeFvTKDTX7NGEQlqBTuGrrHnmU3nWTNrHnEc7Nf5e6Dz1
flSIukPmSkokuO+mlBEw7bTt/ssglUrAFzyRd1a2o2R0PzE3xRFvmMl1+iCDfhfH44E6
rmQg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
:message-id:subject:to:cc;
bh=gz8pcR25vzBz21zA2XmNQSrCavRt6QD8AEEKy+auesQ=;
b=rYSvhiPMP0B2mxQ4x9jCOkaEyqTCZizE8EdGcNREmEdYf5jrssd2TiTix2uHH98Tku
YBhJbGi5lffwSJJ8acQd/8aqhL0o1jqMefvdi+PaJ5R4XeBz9HrKSayijdhEbNBH29oB
Ib1TKAwrBX39vjTS+Kdk0Ky7zj+KmY0DY0zZu1x4kKA6tASeConZEUdlZ7qgcdB+wo61
nCGGuEZW8aNBL0x6RDE/sBvZc38FdiZ+OK/buZxl97hxN6VJA2GyzJNGW98ymO5BWB4t
Kk0QtqxSCCS+DEdmE7o4P21EDRvHkkke5PteFXts297Yhb+T5ceD7I7KGm/gicVrxwyP
3s5g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mWJtHlRyeJil+sfmbCXm8MjEXPwnxB9IGaAQhJcIasEDXzmKWzw/AJG5X4ma/79s4/jpAPMPU2jsUZeg==
X-Received: by 10.31.225.71 with SMTP id y68mr3560230vkg.166.1486583779569;
Wed, 08 Feb 2017 11:56:19 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.103.152.19 with HTTP; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 11:56:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.103.152.19 with HTTP; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 11:56:19 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAMBsKS_JKNJFLB_ao8-dcWgWB8o5bGLbNPrPtvSmobrryZVEmQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ea63ed5a-4280-c063-4984-5bc8a4b2aafa@gmail.com>
<201702052302.29599.luke@dashjr.org>
<CAGCNRJrNRb4Eo5T8+KsKnazOCm15g89RFLtRW07k1KjN6TpTDw@mail.gmail.com>
<201702061953.40774.luke@dashjr.org>
<CAGCNRJo3zM2kYePPw-=JpMQWtn_M1Eg=SpShC_z-d-_Nv6KqcQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAMBsKS9OS2tA4bG-JG96XNZTiPyuq322Qu=fyJcZ1BtVj3TtxQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAy62_LcpgXss9hMTG_kwoGbuTOmfpmEc-awi5gNybq0fYErfQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAMBsKS-Zek5qHB=Yvf0=8EKZkZL8qxAK3n=Cn7Kq6GCwt774_w@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAy62_+AhknwH38fadiT2WTHZsiCZp-sPbVhDnKCHXwatCypnQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAMBsKS_JKNJFLB_ao8-dcWgWB8o5bGLbNPrPtvSmobrryZVEmQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Andrew Johnson <andrew.johnson83@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 13:56:19 -0600
Message-ID: <CAAy62_L7G6aY0hpw-wc6Z+2DWiFUNOX003iTWbbvsZywLV+orA@mail.gmail.com>
To: alp alp <alp.bitcoin@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114e00be1c475505480a4238
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,
HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,
RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=no version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 10:23:41 +0000
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] A Modified Version of Luke-jr's Block Size BIP
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol 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: Wed, 08 Feb 2017 19:56:21 -0000
--001a114e00be1c475505480a4238
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
If a small dissenting minority can block all forward progress then bitcoin
is no longer interesting. What an incredibly simple attack vector...
No need to break any cryptography, find a bug to exploit, build tens of
millions of dollars in mining hardware, spend lots of bitcoin on fees to
flood the network, or be clever or expend any valuable resources in any
way, shape, or form.
Just convince(or pay, if you do want to expend some resources) a few
people(or make up a few online personas) to staunchly refuse to accept
anything at all and the entire system is stuck in 2013(when we first
started widely discussing a blocksize increase seriously).
Is that really the bitcoin that you want to be a part of?
When the 1MB cap was implemented it was stated specifically that we could
increase it when we needed it. The white paper even talks about scaling to
huge capacity. Not sure where you got the idea that we all agreed to stay
at 1MB forever, I certainly didn't. It was never stated or implied that we
could change the coin cap later(please cite if I'm mistaken).
On Feb 8, 2017 12:16 PM, "alp alp" <alp.bitcoin@gmail.com> wrote:
Doing nothing is the rules we all agreed to. If those rules are to be
changed,nearly everyone will need to consent. The same rule applies to the
cap, we all agreed to 21m, and if someone wants to change that, nearly
everyone would need to agree.
On Feb 8, 2017 10:28 AM, "Andrew Johnson" <andrew.johnson83@gmail.com>
wrote:
It is when you're talking about making a choice and 6.3x more people prefer
something else. Doing nothing is a choice as well.
Put another way, if 10% supported increasing the 21M coin cap and 63% were
against, would you seriously consider doing it?
On Feb 8, 2017 9:57 AM, "alp alp" <alp.bitcoin@gmail.com> wrote:
> 10% is not a tiny minority.
>
> On Feb 8, 2017 9:51 AM, "Andrew Johnson" <andrew.johnson83@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> You're never going to reach 100% agreement, and stifling the network
>> literally forever to please a tiny minority is daft.
>>
>> On Feb 8, 2017 8:52 AM, "alp alp via bitcoin-dev" <
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> 10% say literally never. That seems like a significant
>> disenfranchisement and lack of consensus.
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 2:25 PM, t. khan via bitcoin-dev <
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Monday, February 06, 2017 6:19:43 PM you wrote:
>>>> > >My BIP draft didn't make progress because the community opposes any
>>>> block
>>>> > >size increase hardfork ever.
>>>> >
>>>> > Luke, how do you know the community opposes that? Specifically, how
>>>> did you
>>>> > come to this conclusion?
>>>>
>>>> http://www.strawpoll.me/12228388/r
>>>
>>>
>>> That poll shows 63% of votes want a larger than 1 MB block by this
>>> summer. How do you go from that to "the community opposes any block
>>> increase ever"? It shows the exact opposite of that.
>>>
>>>
>>>> > >Your version doesn't address the current block size
>>>> > >issues (ie, the blocks being too large).
>>>> >
>>>> > Why do you think blocks are "too large"? Please cite some evidence.
>>>> I've
>>>> > asked this before and you ignored it, but an answer would be helpful
>>>> to the
>>>> > discussion.
>>>>
>>>> Full node count is far below the safe minimum of 85% of economic
>>>> activity.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Is this causing a problem now? If so, what?
>>>
>>>
>>>> Typically reasons given for people not using full nodes themselves come
>>>> down
>>>> to the high resource requirements caused by the block size.
>>>
>>>
>>> The reason people stop running nodes is because there's no incentive to
>>> counteract the resource costs. Attempting to solve this by making blocks
>>> *smaller* is like curing a disease by killing the patient. (Incentivizing
>>> full node operation would fix that problem.)
>>>
>>> - t.k.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
>>
>>
--001a114e00be1c475505480a4238
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"auto"><div>If a small dissenting minority can block all forward=
progress then bitcoin is no longer interesting.=C2=A0 What an incredibly s=
imple attack vector...<div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">No need=
to break any cryptography, find a bug to exploit, build tens of millions o=
f dollars in mining hardware, spend lots of bitcoin on fees to flood the ne=
twork, or be clever or expend any valuable resources in any way, shape, or =
form.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Just convince(or p=
ay, if you do want to expend some resources) a few people(or make up a few =
online personas) to staunchly refuse to accept anything at all and the enti=
re system is stuck in 2013(when we first started widely discussing a blocks=
ize increase seriously).</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto"=
>Is that really the bitcoin that you want to be a part of?</div><div dir=3D=
"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">When the 1MB cap was implemented it was =
stated specifically that we could increase it when we needed it.=C2=A0 The =
white paper even talks about scaling to huge capacity.=C2=A0 Not sure where=
you got the idea that we all agreed to stay at 1MB forever, I certainly di=
dn't.=C2=A0 It was never stated or implied that we could change the coi=
n cap later(please cite if I'm mistaken).</div><br><div class=3D"gmail_=
extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Feb 8, 2017 12:16 PM, "alp al=
p" <<a href=3D"mailto:alp.bitcoin@gmail.com">alp.bitcoin@gmail.com<=
/a>> wrote:<br type=3D"attribution"><blockquote class=3D"quote" style=3D=
"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D=
"auto"><div>Doing nothing is the rules we all agreed to.=C2=A0 If those rul=
es are to be changed,nearly everyone will need to consent.=C2=A0 The same r=
ule applies to the cap, we all agreed to 21m, and if someone wants to chang=
e that, nearly everyone would need to agree.<div class=3D"elided-text"><br>=
<div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Feb 8, 2017 10=
:28 AM, "Andrew Johnson" <<a href=3D"mailto:andrew.johnson83@g=
mail.com" target=3D"_blank">andrew.johnson83@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br ty=
pe=3D"attribution"><blockquote class=3D"m_8271390937067804642quote" style=
=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=
=3D"auto">It is when you're talking about making a choice and 6.3x more=
people prefer something else. Doing nothing is a choice as well.<div dir=
=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Put another way, if 10% supported inc=
reasing the 21M coin cap and 63% were against, would you seriously consider=
doing it?</div></div><div class=3D"m_8271390937067804642elided-text"><div =
class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Feb 8, 2017 9:57 AM=
, "alp alp" <<a href=3D"mailto:alp.bitcoin@gmail.com" target=
=3D"_blank">alp.bitcoin@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br type=3D"attribution"><b=
lockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px =
#ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"auto">10% is not a tiny minority.<=
/div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Feb 8, 20=
17 9:51 AM, "Andrew Johnson" <<a href=3D"mailto:andrew.johnson=
83@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">andrew.johnson83@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<b=
r type=3D"attribution"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 =
0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"auto"><di=
v>You're never going to reach 100% agreement, and stifling the network =
literally forever to please a tiny minority is daft.<br><div class=3D"gmail=
_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Feb 8, 2017 8:52 AM, "alp al=
p via bitcoin-dev" <<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfounda=
tion.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfounda<wbr>tion.org</a>&=
gt; wrote:<br type=3D"attribution"><blockquote class=3D"m_82713909370678046=
42m_-4533964880556653042m_-8682514029143378247m_-1566305387424443597quote" =
style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><di=
v dir=3D"ltr">10% say literally never.=C2=A0 That seems like a significant =
disenfranchisement and lack of consensus.</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><=
br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div class=3D"m_8271390937067804642m_-4533964=
880556653042m_-8682514029143378247m_-1566305387424443597elided-text">On Mon=
, Feb 6, 2017 at 2:25 PM, t. khan via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a =
href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bit=
coin-dev@lists.linuxfounda<wbr>tion.org</a>></span> wrote:<br></div><blo=
ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #c=
cc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"m_8271390937067804642m_-4533964880=
556653042m_-8682514029143378247m_-1566305387424443597elided-text"><div dir=
=3D"ltr"><div>On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Luke Dashjr <span dir=3D"ltr"=
><<a href=3D"mailto:luke@dashjr.org" target=3D"_blank">luke@dashjr.org</=
a>></span> wrote:<br></div><div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D=
"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px=
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(=
204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span><span class=3D"m_8271390937067804642m_=
-4533964880556653042m_-8682514029143378247m_-1566305387424443597m_-86036786=
74590328520m_5903971323563278916gmail-">On Monday, February 06, 2017 6:19:4=
3 PM you wrote:<br>
> >My BIP draft didn't make progress because the community oppose=
s any block<br>
> >size increase hardfork ever.<br>
><br>
</span></span><span><span class=3D"m_8271390937067804642m_-4533964880556653=
042m_-8682514029143378247m_-1566305387424443597m_-8603678674590328520m_5903=
971323563278916gmail-">> Luke, how do you know the community opposes tha=
t? Specifically, how did you<br>
> come to this conclusion?<br>
<br>
</span></span><a href=3D"http://www.strawpoll.me/12228388/r" rel=3D"norefer=
rer" target=3D"_blank">http://www.strawpoll.me/122283<wbr>88/r</a></blockqu=
ote><div><br></div>That poll shows 63% of votes want a larger than 1 MB blo=
ck by this summer. How do you go from that to "the community opposes a=
ny block increase ever"? It shows the exact opposite of that.<div>=C2=
=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8e=
x;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,2=
04,204);padding-left:1ex"><span><span class=3D"m_8271390937067804642m_-4533=
964880556653042m_-8682514029143378247m_-1566305387424443597m_-8603678674590=
328520m_5903971323563278916gmail-">
> >Your version doesn't address the current block size<br>
> >issues (ie, the blocks being too large).<br>
><br>
> Why do you think blocks are "too large"? Please cite some ev=
idence. I've<br>
> asked this before and you ignored it, but an answer would be helpful t=
o the<br>
> discussion.<br>
<br>
</span></span>Full node count is far below the safe minimum of 85% of econo=
mic activity.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Is this causing a problem=
now? If so, what?</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" =
style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:s=
olid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
Typically reasons given for people not using full nodes themselves come dow=
n<br>
to the high resource requirements caused by the block size.</blockquote><di=
v><br></div><div>The reason people stop running nodes is because there'=
s no incentive to counteract the resource costs. Attempting to solve this b=
y making blocks *smaller* is like curing a disease by killing the patient. =
(Incentivizing full node operation would fix that problem.)<br></div><div><=
br></div><div>- t.k.</div></div><br></div></div></div>
<br></div><div class=3D"m_8271390937067804642m_-4533964880556653042m_-86825=
14029143378247m_-1566305387424443597quoted-text">__________________________=
____<wbr>_________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundat<wbr>ion.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org=
/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-d<wbr>ev</a><br>
<br></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundat<wbr>ion.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org=
/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-d<wbr>ev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div></div>
</blockquote></div></div>
</div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div></div>
--001a114e00be1c475505480a4238--
|
