Return-Path: <hectorchu@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D079C8C7
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Tue,  4 Aug 2015 13:28:56 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-la0-f44.google.com (mail-la0-f44.google.com
	[209.85.215.44])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2EF5A1C4
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Tue,  4 Aug 2015 13:28:56 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by lady2 with SMTP id y2so3331720lad.0
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Tue, 04 Aug 2015 06:28:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
	:cc:content-type;
	bh=QtP8eewUs9YOcDMjeH3YQ5XT/j9fG9HU3doqUqebnFo=;
	b=zbfmFceGp+wEptJewWoBzyg2RikuL/n/W3l5K04cNvc06fYQdEcU0hlFs7BDcofXfF
	/Wwu35HqisrrJx1o+TxZsQ6khPl1MboATr+KUcedCLDzdkg16B+NZ7kqRB2AnFQWIRf4
	rfBfxtFFVyCZ99/AoZP6qm79I0ySWOOqoDAfdd+qttc0OlISoqd1PiYNnwLyjzoUnMAs
	6WhNFxF5A8p+MLUudrTmC3FQW7xMQdZxjM4dEq2VQdBn6yjW8aDtHieRKuln0GvWstJY
	WgEjT1ozzNSxWvMggcyMJBcWYIsGywzPgsDlH/tBybXKiNixNH4o0NfswCKyiVRUtEDz
	DiFg==
X-Received: by 10.152.182.194 with SMTP id eg2mr3430484lac.71.1438694934249;
	Tue, 04 Aug 2015 06:28:54 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.25.22.25 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Aug 2015 06:28:34 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABm2gDqU=nxXP1YACLJRRSoe26yW7vbkw9WvHrOu2=euELcemw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPg+sBj-wA1DMrwkQRWnzQoB5NR-q=2-5=WDAAUYfSpXRZSTqw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABsx9T1NqBX9Tr8vRCtCeri76e0wrtkvRhEPyG9Advv_3Uqxng@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPg+sBjwVxYTOn3+bwahHGSGpBh5BCh5b4OOFkw_2x97YZSFPQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+w+GKS_wDDgf=HjPgD5QZ_wdTRg7i_oYUgBRmh9HpufETAP=w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABm2gDqvpWdHdjo1OBzbw-6ivu5DEGcfvK8duc3-KAjsSeWapA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+w+GKRPPcgCO0pBP2PjKGU49tWuBoF1vRJzY+4fWn71HOVDPw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABm2gDqV1NdHJZBmUWX3AxVYy6ErU7AB-wsWgGzbiTL1twdq6g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+w+GKTLBWj6b4ppwrmnXb_gybYFcrX7haLBSdCnMaijy2An4w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABm2gDpWPhYNh=g-ZXCsfe-aPq=N6NKSWKP9kr-KtPVrWAxB7Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAO2FKHsczkwwqO87cJFtxBp9JE=vf=GcxLx37GpRUkPq8VGHQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPg+sBjvzxGAPvk6PEhuxWzg00+krY_+goZbCLTWngvrCVCKvA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAO2FKFD8X9o3R9KRXdFiBmSiFRm4fHtS7YAJNygMFv5UAY3hg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABm2gDqU=nxXP1YACLJRRSoe26yW7vbkw9WvHrOu2=euELcemw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Hector Chu <hectorchu@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2015 14:28:34 +0100
Message-ID: <CAAO2FKF3fpiKJYBm=xmCgJwKNydupdZVMw2AMW-WCfWbuVhFHQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113491f27f072a051c7c44a8
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
	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 <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Block size following technological growth
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2015 13:28:57 -0000

--001a113491f27f072a051c7c44a8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 4 August 2015 at 14:13, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <jtimon@jtimon.cc> wrote:

> 2) It doesn't matter who is to blame about the current centralization:
> the fact remains that the blocksize maximum is the only** consensus
> rule to limit mining centralization.
>

Repeating a claim ad-nauseum doesn't make it necessarily true. A block size
limit won't prevent miners in the future from buying each other out.

--001a113491f27f072a051c7c44a8
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On 4=
 August 2015 at 14:13, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"ma=
ilto:jtimon@jtimon.cc" target=3D"_blank">jtimon@jtimon.cc</a>&gt;</span> wr=
ote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border=
-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">2) It doesn&#39;t matter who is to b=
lame about the current centralization:<br>
the fact remains that the blocksize maximum is the only** consensus<br>
<span class=3D"">rule to limit mining centralization.<br></span></blockquot=
e><div><br></div><div>Repeating a claim ad-nauseum doesn&#39;t make it nece=
ssarily true. A block size limit won&#39;t prevent miners in the future fro=
m buying each other out.=C2=A0</div></div></div></div>

--001a113491f27f072a051c7c44a8--