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
|
Return-Path: <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A62288B
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 10 Aug 2015 23:11:16 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-ig0-f175.google.com (mail-ig0-f175.google.com
[209.85.213.175])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AEBC4FB
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 10 Aug 2015 23:11:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by igbpg9 with SMTP id pg9so79935626igb.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 10 Aug 2015 16:11:15 -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=RhTnHlhe5T3S11oGZRfV1o27HnM8vhe1A0eLd3QUDf0=;
b=nebX8MYoQ+yp9OGX4DenDiF196TA3190vUO1TeeIg53/0cNQYv7URc8fUcN8vy6/dk
NlkX9fOxuD05pPDtIwZtN5TsqWqbtuRgN4nqBzJ75WjSESaYDQ/lFcHbfRWcVA7+LDbU
tY6hSw8B+YJOfADS/9NIg2uJkMoYEKuMHhK9BYpz8LqKMED8WvEBq/4VQD9bAfXpGBoI
LL2BLcD03XvOjYneqN+TCRMEpDJy0dAj7SKNjTcZB0lvz3kKFRT+zhENSlFCodDvSYBd
DOLLcj+y6DujPrtL5VK62dJEM4FezNWqUvi0J8Ui9y0Nv0Lp8/nAfW07v3cNEuKgeZdY
6IWA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.243.229 with SMTP id xb5mr3785595igc.0.1439248275155;
Mon, 10 Aug 2015 16:11:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.36.77.201 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Aug 2015 16:11:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.36.77.201 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Aug 2015 16:11:14 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAPg+sBhY1Suu961aCn8QB1qw0ps7zj4hhUzOup2MJH+dTrPkkw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABsx9T16fH+56isq95m4+QWsKwP==tf75ep8ghnEcBoV4OtZJA@mail.gmail.com>
<CABsx9T2aZHe5382_fC7bEG2OFPadS3p0jjaAD8FW7p36XS7tcA@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDqokER8=1PRW6u76BK4BgpDQZgbPw5_2HZztG1j6Mxg8A@mail.gmail.com>
<1472719.PaoH0O6gJe@coldstorage>
<CAPg+sBhY1Suu961aCn8QB1qw0ps7zj4hhUzOup2MJH+dTrPkkw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 01:11:14 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPg+sBjjcQ6pN3ogpfPtU6YE47LuPDFR4Zu=X0++pnHQSn7FHg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
To: Thomas Zander <thomas@thomaszander.se>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1134bace2f3e21051cfd1a03
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fees and the block-finding process
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: Mon, 10 Aug 2015 23:11:16 -0000
--001a1134bace2f3e21051cfd1a03
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Aug 11, 2015 12:52 AM, "Pieter Wuille" <pieter.wuille@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 11, 2015 12:18 AM, "Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> > Have you ever been to a concert that was far away from public
transport? They
> > typically set up bus shuttles, or taxis to get people back into town
> > afterwards.
> > The result there is always you end up waiting forever and it actually
may be
> > easier to just walk instead of wait.
> > The amount you pay is irrelevant if everyone is paying it. There still
is more
> > demand than there is capacity.
>
> That's an incorrect analogy. You choose the rate you pay, and get higher
priority when you pay more. Taxi drivers can't pick out higher-paying
customers in advance.
I'm sorry, I missed your "if everyone is paying it". This changes a lot. I
agree with you: if everyone wants to pay much then it becomes unreliable.
But I don't think that is something we can avoid with a small constant
factor block size increase, and we don't do the world a service by making
it look like it works for longer.
Let's grow within bounderies set by technology and centralization pressure
that we can agree on. Let the market decide whether how they will that will
low volume reliable transactions and/or high volume unreliable ones.
--
Pieter
--001a1134bace2f3e21051cfd1a03
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
<p dir="ltr">On Aug 11, 2015 12:52 AM, "Pieter Wuille" <<a href="mailto:pieter.wuille@gmail.com">pieter.wuille@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Aug 11, 2015 12:18 AM, "Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev" <<a href="mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> > Have you ever been to a concert that was far away from public transport? They<br>
> > typically set up bus shuttles, or taxis to get people back into town<br>
> > afterwards.<br>
> > The result there is always you end up waiting forever and it actually may be<br>
> > easier to just walk instead of wait.<br>
> > The amount you pay is irrelevant if everyone is paying it. There still is more<br>
> > demand than there is capacity.<br>
><br>
> That's an incorrect analogy. You choose the rate you pay, and get higher priority when you pay more. Taxi drivers can't pick out higher-paying customers in advance.</p>
<p dir="ltr">I'm sorry, I missed your "if everyone is paying it". This changes a lot. I agree with you: if everyone wants to pay much then it becomes unreliable.</p>
<p dir="ltr">But I don't think that is something we can avoid with a small constant factor block size increase, and we don't do the world a service by making it look like it works for longer. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Let's grow within bounderies set by technology and centralization pressure that we can agree on. Let the market decide whether how they will that will low volume reliable transactions and/or high volume unreliable ones.</p>
<p dir="ltr">-- <br>
Pieter<br>
</p>
--001a1134bace2f3e21051cfd1a03--
|
