Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 552725AC for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2017 22:19:14 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-wm0-f44.google.com (mail-wm0-f44.google.com [74.125.82.44]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C77ED8D for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2017 22:19:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wm0-f44.google.com with SMTP id o81so14517322wmb.1 for ; Sat, 08 Apr 2017 15:19:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=6smhsfqo4VqGsaE0EyTDYYvxjZpxHLAd5Nc8VY0l+TQ=; b=DVvdnrzUuA3B5byA14mKNwzTX/QPfhDeL68kaVTL/38dbWYWDRsQh1+iSGv+Dszv8A O5ecJoWpyyn2YrlG6TVhRwvU4NcAoljqtpUkpUySXrUPc8ssnezY/ueLitWlTJVebj0H JlILlrYxfqHTDLiB3C7svptRYbO8kHE9Ad7abmPcxGSl2hxXt9KY7jNRCTvjqIy9Zb/R zUwmnEsb4rjmovqurrd78ImiMP6flaWBush6QV7bsw+ynZDxlYcuMn+AeijyySXz6I+x cRNgJeuwEZZpEI3DeFaVrIg1ipEsKcvG8mfTgx4lgnzTqcghGWNyk8Oz6IRbjd08taqw Tqxg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=6smhsfqo4VqGsaE0EyTDYYvxjZpxHLAd5Nc8VY0l+TQ=; b=F0VeEp3Jo16s4+cSCjfmS6PvRIUaop2tovilzt2tPf61coOmxGdiNk0jmB7DO5GUva dl+jToBThWPHHR+D+feYSWzIJ/uuzL1h3y/lhWfBsQ8EcsLe8ovUjizIG1yFYRmzMePd +ZUgHBhzZYr5qvZPLXrs1+sj6ZwGRB3r4AFN84VA3wAMcZbADLG23sVmWRiPEG9A7QnV x8PoJHKsN279r55GddM2efbIYjtVcIz3s+H8Mc9S824c+R69BRUaU8L/5LVqdqtxgXuO NjsfDs9ArqzMGuZJaM1Nwx4FlEDGhxQirE5y44v1yKps3MQChsKl0hZ1ltwxBov3fA7w Fi/Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/5EghPeX1cevWhVt9XIbDZ0LRCAxN+32s+ggIb1JkV6z+V0nKBE3ShHQLSH7HYKm8MMIlXwV5Pc3T35XA== X-Received: by 10.28.60.6 with SMTP id j6mr4214530wma.19.1491689952386; Sat, 08 Apr 2017 15:19:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.134.243 with HTTP; Sat, 8 Apr 2017 15:19:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Jimmy Song Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2017 17:19:11 -0500 Message-ID: To: Pavel Moravec Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1148e60aba25b2054caf2192 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE, 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: Sat, 08 Apr 2017 22:20:07 +0000 Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] A Small Modification to Segwit 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: Sat, 08 Apr 2017 22:19:14 -0000 --001a1148e60aba25b2054caf2192 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Pavel, > I agree. I only wanted to make clear, that the impact would be > significant. Lot of parties would be involved with nonequivalent > starting positions. > > I agree with you. I believe nonequivalent starting positions are the norm in mining, not the exception and hence don't believe this to be a problem. > > I think the ASICBoost can and should be prevented completely. > It certainly can be and from the responses I'm getting, I believe there would be at least a few people that would enthusiastically support a BIP to do that. That is, however, a separate issue than my proposal. My proposal aims to bring ASICBoost out into the open *while it is still possible*. A BIP to prevent ASICBoost completely is in that sense compatible. --001a1148e60aba25b2054caf2192 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Pavel,
=C2=A0
I agree. I only wanted to make clear, that the impact would be
significant. Lot of parties would be involved with nonequivalent
starting positions.


I agree with y= ou. I believe nonequivalent starting positions are the norm in mining, not = the exception and hence don't believe this to be a problem.
= =C2=A0

I think the ASICBoost can and should be prevented completely.

It certainly can be and from the responses I&= #39;m getting, I believe there would be at least a few people that would en= thusiastically support a BIP to do that. That is, however, a separate issue= than my proposal. My proposal aims to bring ASICBoost out into the open *w= hile it is still possible*. A BIP to prevent ASICBoost completely is in tha= t sense compatible.
--001a1148e60aba25b2054caf2192--