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
|
Return-Path: <anthony.j.towns@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DFD3C7D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 4 Aug 2015 14:22:21 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wi0-f174.google.com (mail-wi0-f174.google.com
[209.85.212.174])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E0B2B1C5
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 4 Aug 2015 14:22:20 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wibud3 with SMTP id ud3so179548903wib.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 04 Aug 2015 07:22:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject
:from:to:cc:content-type;
bh=hrfvIWCs2SvV2B/fKIRKc+TfDLpJCJGTWfHJBQOeTjA=;
b=kbB1xKetM2i/tkVGzOngaLN6JjKU9m5HdFuqZ7D4kwSzEHUEMQtfrLQWfW+GudqwKF
OT4BBELZ4yCJb/wzOO//eNrKdYpOIc2Wl1Vkdm27h2V8nfRiNUhFFR2MubOWxdITS5oz
1BO94vaAUWT1ByNIsybloxnTt+bO/UYjS7RQulfBdGD1WRKST/PpCh0vnxYXtq5jOXmj
rPpolrJZ3rhOyuG1B12G7/pVfwIiPQ2bMYAa8w5eEf8IZlmNkdwCWDW0vzX3aeTIRnFC
Ly5tEU5iZuRZJq2JXInGsOPBuuaKtVlSlyZz/exb7MJWgHcdofd0oVwnv+ozUm8x5CQ9
M1HA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.96.1 with SMTP id do1mr7963315wib.37.1438698139680; Tue,
04 Aug 2015 07:22:19 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: anthony.j.towns@gmail.com
Received: by 10.28.143.141 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Aug 2015 07:22:19 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABsx9T1E1s=4h-SxLTOAXK4GniZrUekcEb6zDdTDFG+h7X98MA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABsx9T1E1s=4h-SxLTOAXK4GniZrUekcEb6zDdTDFG+h7X98MA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2015 00:22:19 +1000
X-Google-Sender-Auth: CXVMCeBkxW26GJYTc7eiWFHLyP4
Message-ID: <CAJS_LCXkr1y+4ENbvT5B-kJiN=fJWX9CMgknbBfS3dDtVMm+0w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au>
To: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04447fc58e0a37051c7d0385
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,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] Eli Dourado on "governance"
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: Tue, 04 Aug 2015 14:22:22 -0000
--f46d04447fc58e0a37051c7d0385
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 4 August 2015 at 01:22, Gavin Andresen via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> And the preliminary results of using a prediction market to try to wrestl=
e
> with the tough tradeoffs looks roughly correct to me, too:
> https://blocksizedebate.com/
>
=E2=80=8BThe scicast prediction market is shutdown atm (since early July?) =
so those
numbers aren't live. But...
Network hash rate
3,255.17 PH/s (same block size)
5,032.64 PH/s (block size increase)
4,969.68 PH/s (no replace-by-fee)
3,132.09 PH/s (replace-by-fee)
Those numbers seem completely implausible: that's ~2.9-3.6 doublings of the
current hashrate (< 400PH/s) in 17 months, when it's taken 12 months for
the last doubling, and there's a block reward reduction due in that period
too. (That might've been a reasonable prediction sometime in the past year,
when doublings were slowing from once every ~45 days to once a year; it
just doesn't seem a supportable prediction now)
That the PH/s rate is higher with bigger blocks is surprising, but given
that site also predicts USD/BTC will be $280 with no change but $555 with
bigger blocks, so I assume that difference is mostly due to price. Also,
12.5btc at $555 each is about 23 btc at $300 each, so if that price
increase is realistic, it would compensate for almost all of the block
reward reduction.
Daily transaction volume
168,438.22 tx/day (same block size)
193,773.08 tx/day (block size increase)
192,603.80 tx/day (no replace-by-fee)
168,406.73 tx/day (replace-by-fee)
That's only a 15% increase in transaction volume due to the block size
increase; I would have expected more? 168k-194k tx/day is also only a
30%-50% increase in transaction volume from 130k tx/day currently. If
that's really the case, then a 1.5MB-2MB max block size would probably be
enough for the next two years...
(Predicting that the node count will drop from ~5000 to ~1200 due to
increasing block sizes seems quite an indictment as far as centralisation
risks go; but given I'm not that convinced by the other predictions, I'm
not sure I want to give that much weight to that one either)
Cheers,
aj
--=20
Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au>
--f46d04447fc58e0a37051c7d0385
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:monospac=
e"><span style=3D"font-family:arial,sans-serif">On 4 August 2015 at 01:22, =
Gavin Andresen via bitcoin-dev </span><span dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"font-famil=
y:arial,sans-serif"><<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation=
.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>></span=
><span style=3D"font-family:arial,sans-serif"> wrote:</span><br></div><div =
class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail=
_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:=
1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>And the preliminary results of using a predictio=
n market to try to wrestle with the tough tradeoffs looks roughly correct t=
o me, too:</div><div>=C2=A0 =C2=A0<a href=3D"https://blocksizedebate.com/" =
target=3D"_blank">https://blocksizedebate.com/</a></div></div></blockquote>=
<div><br></div><div><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:monos=
pace">=E2=80=8BThe scicast prediction market is shutdown atm (since early J=
uly?) so those numbers aren't live. But...</div><div class=3D"gmail_def=
ault" style=3D"font-family:monospace"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_default=
"><span style=3D"font-family:monospace">Network hash rate</span><br></div><=
div class=3D"gmail_default"><span class=3D"Apple-tab-span" style=3D"font-fa=
mily:monospace;white-space:pre"> </span><span style=3D"font-family:monospac=
e">3,255.17 PH/s =C2=A0(same block size)</span></div><div class=3D"gmail_de=
fault"><span class=3D"Apple-tab-span" style=3D"font-family:monospace;white-=
space:pre"> </span><span style=3D"font-family:monospace">5,032.64 PH/s =C2=
=A0(block size increase)</span><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_default"><div =
class=3D"gmail_default"><font face=3D"monospace"><br></font></div><div clas=
s=3D"gmail_default"><span class=3D"Apple-tab-span" style=3D"font-family:mon=
ospace;white-space:pre"> </span><span style=3D"font-family:monospace">4,969=
.68 PH/s =C2=A0(no replace-by-fee)</span><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_defa=
ult"><font face=3D"monospace"><span class=3D"Apple-tab-span" style=3D"white=
-space:pre"> </span>3,132.09 PH/s =C2=A0(replace-by-fee)</font></div><div c=
lass=3D"gmail_default"><font face=3D"monospace"><br></font></div><div class=
=3D"gmail_default"><font face=3D"monospace">Those numbers seem completely i=
mplausible: that's ~2.9-3.6 doublings of the current hashrate (< 400=
PH/s) in 17 months, when it's taken 12 months for the last doubling, an=
d there's a block reward reduction due in that period too. (That might&=
#39;ve been a reasonable prediction sometime in the past year, when doublin=
gs were slowing from once every ~45 days to once a year; it just doesn'=
t seem a supportable prediction now)</font></div><div class=3D"gmail_defaul=
t"><font face=3D"monospace"><br></font></div><div class=3D"gmail_default"><=
font face=3D"monospace">That the PH/s rate is higher with bigger blocks is =
surprising, but given that site also predicts USD/BTC will be $280 with no =
change but $555 with bigger blocks, so I assume that difference is mostly d=
ue to price. Also, 12.5btc at $555 each is about 23 btc at $300 each, so if=
that price increase is realistic, it would compensate for almost all of th=
e block reward reduction.</font></div><div><font face=3D"monospace"><br></f=
ont></div></div><div class=3D"gmail_default"><font face=3D"monospace">Daily=
transaction volume</font></div><div class=3D"gmail_default"><font face=3D"=
monospace"><span class=3D"Apple-tab-span" style=3D"white-space:pre"> </span=
>168,438.22 tx/day =C2=A0(same block size)</font></div><div class=3D"gmail_=
default"><font face=3D"monospace"><span class=3D"Apple-tab-span" style=3D"w=
hite-space:pre"> </span>193,773.08 tx/day =C2=A0(block size increase)</font=
></div><div class=3D"gmail_default"><div class=3D"gmail_default"><br></div>=
<div class=3D"gmail_default"><span class=3D"Apple-tab-span" style=3D"font-f=
amily:monospace;white-space:pre"> </span><span style=3D"font-family:monospa=
ce">192,603.80 tx/day =C2=A0(no replace-by-fee)</span></div><div class=3D"g=
mail_default"><span class=3D"Apple-tab-span" style=3D"font-family:monospace=
;white-space:pre"> </span><span style=3D"font-family:monospace">168,406.73 =
tx/day =C2=A0(replace-by-fee)</span><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_default">=
<span style=3D"font-family:monospace"><br></span></div><div class=3D"gmail_=
default">That's only a 15% increase in transaction volume due to the bl=
ock size increase; I would have expected more? 168k-194k tx/day is also onl=
y a 30%-50% increase in transaction volume from 130k tx/day currently. If t=
hat's really the case, then a 1.5MB-2MB max block size would probably b=
e enough for the next two years...</div><div><span style=3D"font-family:mon=
ospace"><br></span></div><div><span style=3D"font-family:monospace">(Predic=
ting that the node count will drop from ~5000 to ~1200 due to increasing bl=
ock sizes seems quite an indictment as far as centralisation risks go; but =
given I'm not that convinced by the other predictions, I'm not sure=
I want to give that much weight to that one either)</span></div><div><span=
style=3D"font-family:monospace"><br></span></div></div><div class=3D"gmail=
_default"><font face=3D"monospace">Cheers,</font></div></div><div class=3D"=
gmail_default"><font face=3D"monospace">aj</font></div><div><br></div></div=
>-- <br><div class=3D"gmail_signature">Anthony Towns <<a href=3D"mailto:=
aj@erisian.com.au" target=3D"_blank">aj@erisian.com.au</a>></div>
</div></div>
--f46d04447fc58e0a37051c7d0385--
|
