Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1VBVsG-0003fE-KV for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 19 Aug 2013 20:16:24 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.212.41 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.41; envelope-from=frankf44@gmail.com; helo=mail-vb0-f41.google.com; Received: from mail-vb0-f41.google.com ([209.85.212.41]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1VBVsF-0005nI-ES for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 19 Aug 2013 20:16:24 +0000 Received: by mail-vb0-f41.google.com with SMTP id g17so3675868vbg.28 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 2013 13:16:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.220.10.194 with SMTP id q2mr14968437vcq.2.1376943377902; Mon, 19 Aug 2013 13:16:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.165.201 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Aug 2013 13:16:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 15:16:17 -0500 Message-ID: From: Frank F Cc: Bitcoin Dev Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3b944ea73aa04e4529c71 X-Spam-Score: 0.9 (/) 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 (frankf44[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.2 FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT Envelope-from freemail username ends in digit (frankf44[at]gmail.com) 1.2 MISSING_HEADERS Missing To: header 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 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: 1VBVsF-0005nI-ES Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: remove "getwork" RPC from bitcoind X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 20:16:24 -0000 --001a11c3b944ea73aa04e4529c71 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Thank you for setting me straight. Please forgive my ignorance. On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Pieter Wuille wrote: > On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:09 PM, Frank F wrote: > > I strongly object to removing the only mechanism that allows anyone to > say > > that bitcoin is p2p, in the truest sense of the word. Moves like this > that > > favor only the pool operators and private mining interests are signs that > > bitcoin is headed towards a monopoly/cartel model, and that would be a > > tragic outcome for something that holds a great promise. Nobody knows > what > > mining will look like in the future, and denying the individual novice > the > > ability to mine at a small scale, even if we may think it is inefficient > > now, is not a good path to start down. > > > > If there are technical problems with getwork, maybe they should be > addressed > > and fixed instead of outright abandoned. > > They were addressed and fixed in a successor API, getblocktemplate. > It's even more decentralization-friendly, as it allows the caller to > see what transactions the daemon is trying to put into a block, and > even modify it. > > The suggestion here is not to remove functionality - only to remove an > obsolete API for doing so. > > -- > Pieter > -- *MONEY IS OVER!* IF YOU WANT IT ===================================================== The causes of my servitude can be traced to the tyranny of money. -Serj Tankian --001a11c3b944ea73aa04e4529c71 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thank you for setting me straight. Please forgive my ignor= ance.


On= Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.c= om> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10= :09 PM, Frank F <frankf44@gmail.co= m> wrote:
> I strongly object to removing the only mechanism that allows anyone to= say
> that bitcoin is p2p, in the truest sense of the word. Moves like this = that
> favor only the pool operators and private mining interests are signs t= hat
> bitcoin is headed towards a monopoly/cartel model, and that would be a=
> tragic outcome for something that holds a great promise. Nobody knows = what
> mining will look like in the future, and denying the individual novice= the
> ability to mine at a small scale, even if we may think it is inefficie= nt
> now, is not a good path to start down.
>
> If there are technical problems with getwork, maybe they should be add= ressed
> and fixed instead of outright abandoned.

They were addressed and fixed in a successor API, getblocktemplate. It's even more decentralization-friendly, as it allows the caller to see what transactions the daemon is trying to put into a block, and
even modify it.

The suggestion here is not to remove functionality - only to remove an
obsolete API for doing so.

--
Pieter



--
MONE= Y IS OVER!
=A0=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0IF YOU WANT IT
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D
The causes of my servitude can be traced to the tyranny of mon= ey.
-Serj Tankian
--001a11c3b944ea73aa04e4529c71--