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
|
Return-Path: <wtogami@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B2BED1022
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 9 Sep 2015 18:59:20 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-ob0-f173.google.com (mail-ob0-f173.google.com
[209.85.214.173])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 263F63D4
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 9 Sep 2015 18:59:20 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by obuk4 with SMTP id k4so15989071obu.2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 09 Sep 2015 11:59:19 -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:cc
:content-type; bh=Qu8mxTaq0omvi1cScj0+e28GQz/nnJm2JT5/RRB7uNc=;
b=RQvlOjr9TSNd4LEQCN6uyKdtcSHnlZOr7aXQBnZ872OMxeHtftEkuJ0roupoi4xdQd
7ANvZ2xMEtRJ6zNwTQLfIkw6Oe/20X35Xdf7dGnKmTSOOCkb+STVpS2LBN/ZKJ8q3oDB
R7rfHIqa3JWzI3v9cUNjnbZk821NO/1frQAjlsuTmPOiBYwdcWDIiOc5zMzCaONdgB8A
3PwomG7JASCqxKv743ai5XGXZHx0fM1sk3LE/0KubevLR5dGAUMWKUL6EPyNYS4mnmmg
gvaDVDSAzj5Zun3Mtdf3klX3wKvdqRAeuai6wJZbYOI3NHAjD4FUPgzGWGMZkv2aH6XD
IMzQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.121.201 with SMTP id lm9mr27883461obb.85.1441825159369;
Wed, 09 Sep 2015 11:59:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.202.77.199 with HTTP; Wed, 9 Sep 2015 11:59:19 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <55EFA71A.1080102@thinlink.com>
References: <09C8843E-8379-404D-8357-05BDB1F749C1@me.com>
<CAJS_LCWRagQ40c28SGetxeHxnk8FqY3y_X0OxfqaiLbd25dSGg@mail.gmail.com>
<A6B32C22-4006-434E-9B89-D7C99B5743A8@me.com>
<116B26BD-D8E8-4AFD-A619-2EAC348DA5E6@me.com>
<CALqxMTGHiQ_EBfquF8T82H6doueaH04DTmGY9wf5nVhD0kcMgg@mail.gmail.com>
<D727CEA8-7206-4D0A-9815-672C92F73353@me.com>
<55EFA71A.1080102@thinlink.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 11:59:19 -0700
Message-ID: <CAEz79PrV0OOZ+V-YLP4bTyfaHhbMqrP6TAyu-Lt27_guA+wMzg@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Warren Togami Jr." <wtogami@gmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01536a5473dc9e051f5514e2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,MISSING_HEADERS,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=no version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Adjusted difficulty depending on relative
blocksize
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: Wed, 09 Sep 2015 18:59:20 -0000
--089e01536a5473dc9e051f5514e2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Does it really change the schedule when the next difficulty retarget
readjusts to an average of 10 minutes again?
On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 8:27 PM, Tom Harding via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> There is another concern regarding "flexcap" that was not discussed.
>
> A change to difficulty in response to anything BUT observed block
> production rate unavoidably changes the money supply schedule, unless
> you also change the reward, and in that case you've still changed the
> timing even if not the average rate.
>
>
--089e01536a5473dc9e051f5514e2
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">Does it really change the schedule when the next difficult=
y retarget readjusts to an average of 10 minutes again?=C2=A0<br><div class=
=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 8:27=
PM, Tom Harding via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:bi=
tcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.li=
nuxfoundation.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote=
" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><=
br>
There is another concern regarding "flexcap" that was not discuss=
ed.<br>
<br>
A change to difficulty in response to anything BUT observed block<br>
production rate unavoidably changes the money supply schedule, unless<br>
you also change the reward, and in that case you've still changed the<b=
r>
timing even if not the average rate.<br>
<div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5"><br></div></div></blockquote></div>=
</div></div>
--089e01536a5473dc9e051f5514e2--
|
