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
|
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 <ogunden@phauna.org>) id 1Ytink-0000UF-Dc
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sat, 16 May 2015 20:35:16 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of phauna.org
designates 208.82.98.102 as permitted sender)
client-ip=208.82.98.102; envelope-from=ogunden@phauna.org;
helo=peacecow.phauna.org;
Received: from phauna.org ([208.82.98.102] helo=peacecow.phauna.org)
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Ytinj-0005Op-N6
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sat, 16 May 2015 20:35:16 +0000
Received: from pool-108-5-112-231.nwrknj.fios.verizon.net ([108.5.112.231]
helo=[192.168.50.11]) by peacecow.phauna.org with esmtpsa
(TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <ogunden@phauna.org>) id 1Ytind-0002sD-DP
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sat, 16 May 2015 15:35:10 -0500
Message-ID: <5557A9F9.1080408@phauna.org>
Date: Sat, 16 May 2015 16:35:05 -0400
From: Owen Gunden <ogunden@phauna.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
References: <5550D8BE.6070207@electrum.org> <ce3d34c92efd1cf57326e4679550944e@national.shitposting.agency> <CABsx9T1VgxEJWxrYTs+2hXGnGrSLGJ6mVcAexjXLvK7Vu+e3EA@mail.gmail.com> <CABm2gDoQ-atjWKB0c6AC1ZQ9fy22ceFtHHwpLmnX8DLW4DAgYA@mail.gmail.com> <CACq0ZD4_zxhm=qWrP+Nr+fQER4s2R8i7qRjX4HsBWN46uOP2MA@mail.gmail.com> <CAPg+sBjxXe0spytGsP1BUzNZhJFDYu_yacdhTy5F+O-X8EG7NQ@mail.gmail.com> <CACq0ZD7qF0oEYHfQFxLMn3OOD=ibVAfE-U5YURLrtmWVMzDpgQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAPg+sBjs_y6Q7YAQjH1vd=WaRvObp+yuv-OcFFjg6umQ2=UCMQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CACq0ZD6hDN0AY7jza46SuSA=-TqEii99oqR1gQyPt_vA+PqQgw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACq0ZD6hDN0AY7jza46SuSA=-TqEii99oqR1gQyPt_vA+PqQgw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam_score: -2.9
X-Spam_score_int: -28
X-Spam_bar: --
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software,
running on the system "peacecow.phauna.org", has
identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or
label similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: On 05/13/2015 09:31 PM,
Aaron Voisine wrote: > > by people
and businesses deciding to not use on-chain settlement. > > I
completely
agree. Increasing fees will cause people voluntary > economize on
blockspace by finding alternatives, i.e. not bitcoin. [...]
Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ----------------------
--------------------------------------------------
-1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP
-1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
[score: 0.0000]
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
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 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-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: 1Ytinj-0005Op-N6
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Long-term mining incentives
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: Sat, 16 May 2015 20:35:16 -0000
On 05/13/2015 09:31 PM, Aaron Voisine wrote:
> > by people and businesses deciding to not use on-chain settlement.
>
> I completely agree. Increasing fees will cause people voluntary
> economize on blockspace by finding alternatives, i.e. not bitcoin.
This strikes me as a leap. There are alternatives that still use bitcoin
as the unit of value, such as sidechains, offchain, etc. To say that
these are "not bitcoin" is misleading.
> A fee however is a known, upfront cost... unpredictable transaction failure in
> most cases will be a far higher, unacceptable cost to the user than the
> actual fee.
Are we sure that raising the block size is the only way to avoid
"unpredictable transaction failure"? If so, and it's as bad as you say
it is, aren't we screwed anyway when we inevitably start hitting the cap
(even if it's raised 10x or 20x)? And if that's the case, then don't we
do a disservice to users by continuing to pretend that we can make this
problem go away?
> The higher the costs of using the system, the lower the
> adoption as a store-of-value.
On what do you base this? Gold has a very high cost of using (storage,
transport) and yet is perhaps the most widely accepted store of value.
|
