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 1UlxR8-000774-Fg for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 08:26:46 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of googlemail.com designates 74.125.83.43 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.83.43; envelope-from=john.dillon892@googlemail.com; helo=mail-ee0-f43.google.com; Received: from mail-ee0-f43.google.com ([74.125.83.43]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1UlxR7-0006vN-K4 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 08:26:46 +0000 Received: by mail-ee0-f43.google.com with SMTP id l10so2152472eei.2 for ; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 01:26:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.14.203.194 with SMTP id f42mr9985072eeo.53.1370852799243; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 01:26:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.12.141 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 01:26:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 08:26:39 +0000 Message-ID: From: John Dillon To: Melvin Carvalho Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-) 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 (john.dillon892[at]googlemail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.2 FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT Envelope-from freemail username ends in digit (john.dillon892[at]googlemail.com) -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: 1UlxR7-0006vN-K4 Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: Vote on the blocksize limit with proof-of-stake voting 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, 10 Jun 2013 08:26:46 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: > -1 > > Firstly I appreciate the ingenious thought that went into this post. > > However, Bitcoin's fundamental philosophy was one CPU one vote. Indeed it was. Which is why as GPU's came onto the scene Satoshi was strongly against them. I have to wonder what he thinks of ASICs where just a handful of companies control the supply of Bitcoin hashing power. Satoshi also never forsaw pools, which are why just 2 or 3 people control the majority of Bitcoin hashing power. > The asymmetry lies in psychological terms, in that new defaults tend to be > adopted 80% of the time, so core devs have disproportionate amount of power > as things stand. That's why I'm very clear that doing nothing is a vote for the status quo. Of course wallet authors can do what they want to try to get users to vote according to their wishes, or for that matter simply steal your vote, but we already must put a lot of faith into wallets to not steal our funds. > Unless there's a very good reason not to, e.g. miners are clearly abusing > the system, we should stick with 1 CPU one vote. People are proposing we put control of the blocksize entirely into the hands of miners, yet we all have an interest in auditing the blocks miners produce. There must be balance. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJRtY2jAAoJEEWCsU4mNhiPQEsH/0VNA7aJYdUbJjTnIiKoaCv3 JtWS1MKHjAJE6ZPDt+T/QPkEdZI4kNz3DGcZL6EDJtvZxZHfvEIaZDF1gpaH6OkC oIZ0PkFPOxi0cncuAvT/a770evu7LzuT6fisY3EgGnlHujLQZ47LEa73Xo7pJVc7 RJHamGwkj+3HZRIuZIAn87qws/zRyTx5SXvb56xCKb0oxE4ZO0dn+8/nNSPWw13i p3LpLlEQBBu+Du2nPSQupRjkz4MPP8v9EYefV5cjtNBK7ufAvA64OnwKB5dST+h+ N/vBcj3EIj/WEOf4myGcVxKp+skJ2SJDwxLigevgkKYPDNTVfXIverdXB0ANrQA= =c8iU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----