Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44DE4B4C for ; Thu, 15 Dec 2016 18:12:11 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-wj0-f177.google.com (mail-wj0-f177.google.com [209.85.210.177]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D7B052BC for ; Thu, 15 Dec 2016 18:12:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wj0-f177.google.com with SMTP id xy5so72435915wjc.0 for ; Thu, 15 Dec 2016 10:12:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=XN8gQBJrxpsUIJdj2XBZLAwwYzbmkR/o5qpoJggNPLM=; b=nH3kEkm53iY/Du3yZwJw3kR8qUWlMTs4lGR/ezltRnAvn6vk8g/DT9jyor6qaFysRL KheLIaaI+7G6pN/kYI9Z4b5baszndddOzNucHOxHE3Dslg4WFFGSSmVnZQeOSxGU5nJ4 cKwK+8HU4NhNc32Y4+/tK3/UOxkGkkG8/hShiN9BBK5TxL1AloLCNfw9oVfJljX1GGW+ nZ6pmX8Boa3ZWBGYwrihJ/QzqHvfM9r66FL/1/Ulx8H/HsK6i8nGjX8t6s8dFL/m4E8B 6BKuN88BByf9uOyjYYTB0hAGcq/72PodfCJ0ztI7+6Nw7t+2XZCCo3ObdCnJ4dhPrWoF rXwg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=XN8gQBJrxpsUIJdj2XBZLAwwYzbmkR/o5qpoJggNPLM=; b=NanOoc3ifhUpBhOKW0dEH3c8DDkFoSGjqlF2LBXKlcxtKK/BMZlVUVEvAVn2iIj/Gj aJ0wnlbqFe0fLxc+1q77DJhsCljcUOxK9TveBe2EpUS7buSpAxKcxH51ttE+vRcVWYjU f4d4+U54QBCXainJ9CVFinQFCd5JEkPAaF+ERm6az7f70VmhoPr1RVAhwR5Pl/18C8Nf rLL90rSlIFicv0lDz2apX7mL+ppSlfu34K8bHkd2MPP6R0dMUcMlfR173aeirL18dEkP 61at8E69wPdJsDxjihrKNpiR6843Mg+GFwlBMP4WnK3LD3fD9G77y88E64Y+2q1RvinT Qlfw== X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC00sUtANo8yvwApOpnCJwUYeUS9nYCM6PotYiPwbbfjYExg4M3tOYvhqbofOuUjNpA== X-Received: by 10.194.136.166 with SMTP id qb6mr2671811wjb.42.1481825525099; Thu, 15 Dec 2016 10:12:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.10] (ANice-654-1-56-98.w83-201.abo.wanadoo.fr. [83.201.227.98]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id c81sm3475916wmf.22.2016.12.15.10.12.03 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 15 Dec 2016 10:12:04 -0800 (PST) To: jg@112bit.com, Bitcoin Protocol Discussion References: <615c88d2a1263810923705c170b25d33@112bit.com> From: Aymeric Vitte Message-ID: <116c835c-0f3a-b0d6-6d0a-10a959d2f4de@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 19:12:02 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <615c88d2a1263810923705c170b25d33@112bit.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 18:19:00 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Planned Obsolescence X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 18:12:11 -0000 Maybe there are still some advantages but I don't know why this is not considered as a major issue by the bitcoin community for the future and why this looks to be never discussed: - the size of the bitcoin network in terms of full nodes is ridiculous and this is continuously decreasing, we cannot consider the bitcoin network as a decentralized p2p network, what you are proposing is logical but will of course amplify the problem >For reasons I am unable to determine a significant number of node operators do not upgrade their clients. Why should they? What is the incentive for people to run full nodes and upgrade? FYI I am part of the 2071 0.13.1 nodes for some good reasons but will just shut it down when I am done, same for zcash (which as a matter of fact I upgraded today since by some chance I noticed some updates I was not aware of neither notified, just running it because I need it from time to time and just don't kill it so I don't have to wait for the restart process, maybe others are doing the same or just forgot that they were running a full node) Because, again, why should I or we maintain it/them? I have looked at the proposals in the past (as well as the incentive program) to reward those that are running full nodes but only found a very few, never implemented (or even considered) This is the very same for proposals allowing to start a full node from zero in an acceptable timeframe (ie not 10 days in my case) If the consensus is not to solve those two points and have a bitcoin network controlled then it would be interesting to know why, so people don't waste time trying to find solutions Satoshi himself predicted that the full nodes will get centralized, I think it's wrong, or in that case the bitcoin network cannot pretend to be a decentralized immutable system (can be compared then to the Tor network which does not pretend to be decentralized, because it is centralized, and in addition does not encourage small nodes) PS: IMHO the email notificiation system makes it difficult to follow whom is answering to whom/what on this list compared to other lists -- Zcash wallets made simple: https://github.com/Ayms/zcash-wallets Bitcoin wallets made simple: https://github.com/Ayms/bitcoin-wallets Get the torrent dynamic blocklist: http://peersm.com/getblocklist Check the 10 M passwords list: http://peersm.com/findmyass Anti-spies and private torrents, dynamic blocklist: http://torrent-live.org Peersm : http://www.peersm.com torrent-live: https://github.com/Ayms/torrent-live node-Tor : https://www.github.com/Ayms/node-Tor GitHub : https://www.github.com/Ayms