MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <mailman.9.1657195203.20624.bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
 <CAHTn92wR+D=2FLAc7vhhm4kNT6NwDfyKdRj32=E9H3UJ4QcE+Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHTn92wR+D=2FLAc7vhhm4kNT6NwDfyKdRj32=E9H3UJ4QcE+Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Corey Haddad <corey3@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2022 18:02:08 -0400
Message-ID: <CAK_HAC8gv+O2PEPrn16oOK4_J8Y0qze2jv5Sfkos_ycksB2dxw@mail.gmail.com>
To: John Carvalho <john@synonym.to>, 
 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004f172505e33e3dcf"
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin covenants are inevitable
Precedence: list

--0000000000004f172505e33e3dcf
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

>Billy,
>
>Proof of work and the difficulty adjustment function solve literally
everything you are talking about already.
>Bitcoin does not need active economic governanance by devs or meddlers.
>Please stop spamming this list with this nonsensical thread.
>
>Love,
>John

Sorry John, but this is a divisive comment. You are the spammer here. While
it is unclear why you are trying to harm the Bitcoin development process,
you are, and anyone reading this should know that.

Proof of work and the difficulty adjustment have no capability to ensure
that the amount of security is adequate or reasonable.The only proximate
incentive-compatible feedback mechanisms would either make the security too
low or too high, and not approach 'just right'. If the price falls, and the
hashrate goes down, people might conclude that Bitcoin is looking
vulnerable to attack and therefore sell, which would be a negative feedback
loop. Conversely, if a price rise leads to a higher hashrate, people might
think Bitcoin is now even more secure than before and buy, causing a
positive feedback loop. These are not stable equilibria.

PoW and the difficulty adjustments hold block times at 10 minutes, and by
the same token, keep coin issuance roughly on schedule. They have also
turned out to - thus far - have charted a reasonable (albeit predetermined)
course through the various hash-based attacks that lurk out there in the
world. Without any sort or restorative force that guides the security
budget to an optimum, or even towards a reasonable range, we have to
recognize that we are just lucky that Satoshi got it right. When navigating
via dead reckoning, the uncertainty accumulates over time and distance.
Eventually external corrections are needed. We absolutely need to keep
apprised of the current and future threats, assess Bitcoin's resilience in
the face of those threats, and when needed make changes to ensure Bitcoin
remains secure.

Corey

--0000000000004f172505e33e3dcf
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"auto">&gt;Billy,</div><div dir=3D"auto">&gt;</=
div><div dir=3D"auto">&gt;Proof of work and the difficulty adjustment funct=
ion solve literally everything you are talking about already.</div><div dir=
=3D"auto">&gt;Bitcoin does not need active economic governanance by devs or=
 meddlers.<br></div><div dir=3D"auto">&gt;Please stop spamming this list wi=
th this nonsensical thread.<br></div><div dir=3D"auto">&gt;</div><div dir=
=3D"auto">&gt;Love,=C2=A0</div><div dir=3D"auto">&gt;John<br></div><div dir=
=3D"auto"><br></div><div>Sorry John, but this is a divisive=C2=A0comment. Y=
ou are the spammer here. While it is unclear why you are trying to harm the=
 Bitcoin development process, you are, and anyone reading this should know =
that.</div><div><br></div><div>Proof of work and the difficulty adjustment =
have no capability to ensure that the amount of security is adequate=C2=A0o=
r reasonable.The only proximate incentive-compatible feedback mechanisms wo=
uld either make the security=C2=A0too low or too high, and not approach =
9;just=C2=A0right&#39;. If the price falls, and the hashrate goes down, peo=
ple might conclude that Bitcoin is looking vulnerable to attack and therefo=
re sell, which would be a negative feedback loop. Conversely, if a price ri=
se leads to a higher hashrate, people might think Bitcoin is now even more =
secure than before and buy, causing a positive feedback loop. These are not=
 stable equilibria.</div><div><br></div><div>PoW and the difficulty adjustm=
ents hold block times at 10 minutes, and by the same token, keep coin issua=
nce roughly on schedule. They have also turned out to - thus far - have cha=
rted a reasonable (albeit predetermined) course through the various hash-ba=
sed attacks that lurk out there in the world. Without any sort or restorati=
ve=C2=A0force that guides the security budget to an optimum, or even toward=
s a reasonable range, we have to recognize that we are just lucky that Sato=
shi got it right. When navigating via dead reckoning, the uncertainty=C2=A0=
accumulates=C2=A0over time and distance. Eventually external corrections ar=
e needed. We absolutely=C2=A0need to keep apprised of the current and futur=
e threats, assess Bitcoin&#39;s resilience in the face of those threats, an=
d when needed make changes to ensure Bitcoin remains secure.</div><div><br>=
</div><div>Corey</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div>

--0000000000004f172505e33e3dcf--