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
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gustafsonja@gmail.com>) id 1Z3U8d-0004oJ-3R
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 12 Jun 2015 18:57:11 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.218.66 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.218.66; envelope-from=gustafsonja@gmail.com;
helo=mail-oi0-f66.google.com;
Received: from mail-oi0-f66.google.com ([209.85.218.66])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Z3U8b-0000EQ-SL
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 12 Jun 2015 18:57:11 +0000
Received: by oiax69 with SMTP id x69so5317060oia.2
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Fri, 12 Jun 2015 11:57:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.202.95.198 with SMTP id t189mr12522496oib.105.1434135424458;
Fri, 12 Jun 2015 11:57:04 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: gustafsonja@gmail.com
Received: by 10.202.194.68 with HTTP; Fri, 12 Jun 2015 11:56:34 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1900349.Piv8ps0gCz@crushinator>
References: <20150612181153.GB19199@muck> <3287607.HcH18TyfSu@crushinator>
<20150612184450.GG19199@muck> <1900349.Piv8ps0gCz@crushinator>
From: Aaron Gustafson <jag426@cornell.edu>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 11:56:34 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: RFsb8lPjvSkFXL-OKZqqXBZjRD8
Message-ID: <CAAocdpzYbCf6Tmhi6FvThPpEX4Hj4X+BPcPrNtpCK95yJmxM4g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Matt Whitlock <bip@mattwhitlock.name>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113ccfa688e483051856ac6d
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(gustafsonja[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1Z3U8b-0000EQ-SL
Cc: bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] User vote in blocksize through fees
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 18:57:11 -0000
--001a113ccfa688e483051856ac6d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
For the purposes of finding the median, halve < same < double. It will only
change if a majority of non-apathetic votes are for halve or a majority of
non-apathetic votes are for double.
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 11:54 AM, Matt Whitlock <bip@mattwhitlock.name>
wrote:
> On Friday, 12 June 2015, at 7:44 pm, Peter Todd wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 02:36:31PM -0400, Matt Whitlock wrote:
> > > On Friday, 12 June 2015, at 7:34 pm, Peter Todd wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 02:22:36PM -0400, Matt Whitlock wrote:
> > > > > Why should miners only be able to vote for "double the limit" or
> "halve" the limit? If you're going to use bits, I think you need to use two
> bits:
> > > > >
> > > > > 0 0 = no preference ("wildcard" vote)
> > > > > 0 1 = vote for the limit to remain the same
> > > > > 1 0 = vote for the limit to be halved
> > > > > 1 1 = vote for the limit to be doubled
> > > > >
> > > > > User transactions would follow the same usage. In particular, a
> user vote of "0 0" (no preference) could be included in a block casting any
> vote, but a block voting "0 0" (no preference) could only contain
> transactions voting "0 0" as well.
> > > >
> > > > Sounds like a good encoding to me. Taking the median of the three
> > > > options, and throwing away "don't care" votes entirely, makes sense.
> > >
> > > I hope you mean the *plurality* of the three options after throwing
> away the "don't cares," not the *median*.
> >
> > Median ensures that voting "no change" is meaningful. If "double" + "no
> > change" = 66%-1, you'd expect the result to be "no change", not "halve""
> > With a plurality vote you'd end up with a halving that was supported by
> > a minority.
>
> Never mind. I think I've figured out what you're getting at, and you're
> right. We wouldn't want "halve" to win on a plurality just because the
> remaining majority of the vote was split between double and
> remain-the-same. Good catch. :)
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
--
J. Aaron Gustafson
Cornell University '16 | Computer Science, Engineering | Mathematics, Arts
& Sciences
Vice President, Kappa Delta Rho
jag426@cornell.edu | Ithaca, New York
--001a113ccfa688e483051856ac6d
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">For the purposes of finding the median, halve < same &l=
t; double. It will only change if a majority of non-apathetic votes are for=
halve or a majority of non-apathetic votes are for double.</div><div class=
=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 11:=
54 AM, Matt Whitlock <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:bip@mattwhitlo=
ck.name" target=3D"_blank">bip@mattwhitlock.name</a>></span> wrote:<br><=
blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px=
#ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5">On Fr=
iday, 12 June 2015, at 7:44 pm, Peter Todd wrote:<br>
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 02:36:31PM -0400, Matt Whitlock wrote:<br>
> > On Friday, 12 June 2015, at 7:34 pm, Peter Todd wrote:<br>
> > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 02:22:36PM -0400, Matt Whitlock wrot=
e:<br>
> > > > Why should miners only be able to vote for "double=
the limit" or "halve" the limit? If you're going to use=
bits, I think you need to use two bits:<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > >=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A00 0 =3D no preference =
("wildcard" vote)<br>
> > > >=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A00 1 =3D vote for the l=
imit to remain the same<br>
> > > >=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A01 0 =3D vote for the l=
imit to be halved<br>
> > > >=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A01 1 =3D vote for the l=
imit to be doubled<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > User transactions would follow the same usage. In parti=
cular, a user vote of "0 0" (no preference) could be included in =
a block casting any vote, but a block voting "0 0" (no preference=
) could only contain transactions voting "0 0" as well.<br>
> > ><br>
> > > Sounds like a good encoding to me. Taking the median of the =
three<br>
> > > options, and throwing away "don't care" votes =
entirely, makes sense.<br>
> ><br>
> > I hope you mean the *plurality* of the three options after throwi=
ng away the "don't cares," not the *median*.<br>
><br>
> Median ensures that voting "no change" is meaningful. If &qu=
ot;double" + "no<br>
> change" =3D 66%-1, you'd expect the result to be "no cha=
nge", not "halve""<br>
> With a plurality vote you'd end up with a halving that was support=
ed by<br>
> a minority.<br>
<br>
</div></div>Never mind. I think I've figured out what you're gettin=
g at, and you're right. We wouldn't want "halve" to win o=
n a plurality just because the remaining majority of the vote was split bet=
ween double and remain-the-same. Good catch. :)<br>
<div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5"><br>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
---<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Bitcoin-development mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net">Bitcoin-develo=
pment@lists.sourceforge.net</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development=
" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/=
listinfo/bitcoin-development</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear=3D"all"><div><br></div>-- <br>=
<div class=3D"gmail_signature"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>=
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"font-famil=
y:arial;font-size:small">J. Aaron Gustafson</div><div dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"=
font-family:arial;font-size:small">Cornell University '16 | Computer Sc=
ience, Engineering | Mathematics, Arts & Sciences</div><div style=3D"fo=
nt-family:arial;font-size:small">Vice President, Kappa Delta Rho</div><div =
style=3D"font-family:arial;font-size:small"><a href=3D"mailto:jag426@cornel=
l.edu" target=3D"_blank">jag426@cornell.edu</a>=C2=A0| Ithaca, New York</di=
v></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</div>
--001a113ccfa688e483051856ac6d--
|
