Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B40993EE for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 00:43:25 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from st11p02im-asmtp001.me.com (st11p02im-asmtp001.me.com [17.172.220.113]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 63CC28F for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 00:43:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [25.169.112.210] (unknown [24.114.22.25]) by st11p02im-asmtp001.me.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.35.0 64bit (built Mar 31 2015)) with ESMTPSA id <0NS8007BX4O2X320@st11p02im-asmtp001.me.com> for bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 00:43:17 +0000 (GMT) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.14.151,1.0.33,0.0.0000 definitions=2015-07-29_01:2015-07-28, 2015-07-28, 1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1412110000 definitions=main-1507290010 Content-type: text/plain; charset=gb2312 MIME-version: 1.0 (1.0) From: Jean-Paul Kogelman X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (12H143) In-reply-to: <1B7F00D3-41AE-44BF-818D-EC4EF279DC11@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 17:43:14 -0700 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Message-id: References: <1B7F00D3-41AE-44BF-818D-EC4EF279DC11@gmail.com> To: Eric Lombrozo X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MIME_QP_LONG_LINE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RP_MATCHES_RCVD 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 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Why Satoshi's temporary anti-spam measure isn't temporary X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 00:43:25 -0000 > Enter a =A1=B0temporary=A1=B1 anti-spam measure - a one megabyte block siz= e limit. Let=A1=AFs test this out, then increase it once we see how things w= ork. So far so good=A1=AD >=20 The block size limit was put in place as an anti-DoS measure (monster blocks= ), not "anti-spam". It was never intended to have any economic effect, not o= n spam and not on any future fee market. jp