1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>) id 1Z4Rp3-00048t-Kp
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 15 Jun 2015 10:40:57 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.213.47 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.213.47; envelope-from=pieter.wuille@gmail.com;
helo=mail-yh0-f47.google.com;
Received: from mail-yh0-f47.google.com ([209.85.213.47])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Z4Rp2-0001ez-Rf
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 15 Jun 2015 10:40:57 +0000
Received: by yhid80 with SMTP id d80so39714629yhi.1
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Mon, 15 Jun 2015 03:40:51 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.129.131.214 with SMTP id t205mr33124128ywf.26.1434364851400;
Mon, 15 Jun 2015 03:40:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.37.93.67 with HTTP; Mon, 15 Jun 2015 03:40:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP0eGDTafK+ZUBNcQBOe2JU_PqZVXMt0Ds-b8Ley7kbGrA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALqxMTHrnSS9MGgKO-5+=fVhiOOvk12Recs11S0PcSUxQT1wdQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP1nx9rNf1q-nubP77U8RMABuLtmEB_P7UpY2zyFf-Ns-w@mail.gmail.com>
<CALqxMTENbj+E7ypJASrM1r04eW3kYe+afwy+Rt3i9ubeT-=2mA@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP0Z_EOmVgbvVmYDvegm6jfd1cKB52acXHocjRuM-qGEog@mail.gmail.com>
<CAPg+sBgc0i-XsN=g0V4Y0bko-Xb1AT5x=UWDa+opL3eFbBmJfA@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP0eGDTafK+ZUBNcQBOe2JU_PqZVXMt0Ds-b8Ley7kbGrA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 12:40:51 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPg+sBiPhhrBh8f3QxJLtoysfywtVFSo2RH0WXVR+vpX9z6+HQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114f57c072363405188c178c
X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/)
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
(pieter.wuille[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
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
0.0 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
X-Headers-End: 1Z4Rp2-0001ez-Rf
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] comments on BIP 100
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 10:40:57 -0000
--001a114f57c072363405188c178c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 12:36 PM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:
>
> Since you keep bringing this up, I'll try to clarify this once again.
>>
>
> I understand the arguments against it. And I think you are agreeing with
> me - Adam is bemoaning the way developers outsource stuff to third party
> services, and suggesting it is relevant to the block size debate. And we
> are saying, no, it's happening because it's easier than doing things in a
> decentralised way.
>
The fact that using a centralized service is easier isn't a good reason
IMHO. It disregards the long-term, and introduces systemic risk.
But in cases where using a decentralized approach doesn't *add* anything, I
cannot reasonably promote it, and that's why I was against getutxos in the
P2P protocol.
--
Pieter
--001a114f57c072363405188c178c
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 12:36 PM, Mike Hearn <span dir=3D"=
ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:mike@plan99.net" target=3D"_blank">mike@plan99.n=
et</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_=
quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-=
left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_=
extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><span class=3D""><blockquote class=3D=
"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding=
-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_=
quote"><div>Since you keep bringing this up, I'll try to clarify this o=
nce again.<br></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></span><d=
iv>I understand the arguments against it. And I think you are agreeing with=
me - Adam is bemoaning the way developers outsource stuff to third party s=
ervices, and suggesting it is relevant to the block size debate. And we are=
saying, no, it's happening because it's easier than doing things i=
n a decentralised way.</div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><=
div>The fact that using a centralized service is easier isn't a good re=
ason IMHO. It disregards the long-term, and introduces systemic risk.<br><b=
r></div><div>But in cases where using a decentralized approach doesn't =
*add* anything, I cannot reasonably promote it, and that's why I was ag=
ainst getutxos in the P2P protocol.<br><br>-- <br></div><div>Pieter<br>=C2=
=A0<br></div></div><br></div></div>
--001a114f57c072363405188c178c--
|
