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
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
|
Return-Path: <mickeybob@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44EB57AD
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 11 Aug 2015 18:55:59 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wi0-f177.google.com (mail-wi0-f177.google.com
[209.85.212.177])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 05E1F132
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 11 Aug 2015 18:55:57 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wibhh20 with SMTP id hh20so209686247wib.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 11 Aug 2015 11:55:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:cc:content-type;
bh=nRlE/PTxwdGURzeuUw/fgohsRdOSQ2fP4YV4t8yFCfU=;
b=NUN0XZv+jLsmgg+Ok75wGD69hZx9Yl9kg2FHNbPoSRrUFjmhonR1jmK9xemCyQUPVJ
1mY8ufqi6qzMpQoEdM/sFBQ0jHcJECc2L9BgDyzq+MT/+U78WnT9dpR0HLRb4GwgR/6i
Ru1Htb6YiDH1DXYZmGABC3i1xGQNzTOp7KVO6MH3sa9iWELaRAKa0m+yhmK7JXWiPFNa
8i76Vt77l2HL0T2TkMd8PdiVQrCxL/FwNr/CnO1loVPKZYNfBjGwH8LF9G3pStRSHZ5p
cSXbgZOgiahFg/dF7vNm11mLb0LuvQr5J2vgEf1r2l6oTJV3JGMe+o5qbHfUw4D1qIzk
8Mpw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.118.197 with SMTP id ko5mr58809489wjb.58.1439319356790;
Tue, 11 Aug 2015 11:55:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.27.78.207 with HTTP; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 11:55:56 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAOG=w-u61dDpa+QrPfku_TCUW7TJLmKekYPbJrF2onsKXAmWdA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABsx9T16fH+56isq95m4+QWsKwP==tf75ep8ghnEcBoV4OtZJA@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDpwMQzju+Gsoe3qMi60MPr7OAiSuigy3RdA1xh-SwFzbw@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDoz4NMEQuQj6UHCYYCwihZrEC4Az8xDvTBwiZDf9eQ7-w@mail.gmail.com>
<8181630.GdAj0CPZYc@coldstorage>
<CABm2gDp2svO2G5bHs5AcjjN8dmP6P5nv0xriWez-pvzs2oBL5w@mail.gmail.com>
<CALgxB7sQM5ObxyxDiN_BOyJrgsgfQ6PAtJi52dJENfWCRKywWg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAOG=w-u61dDpa+QrPfku_TCUW7TJLmKekYPbJrF2onsKXAmWdA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 13:55:56 -0500
Message-ID: <CALgxB7sdUag_26rKbFYNyRxkS2G6sRZ_GOwPF5U8ri2pobNtcA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Michael Naber <mickeybob@gmail.com>
To: Mark Friedenbach <mark@friedenbach.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0122aec8fadceb051d0da670
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] Fees and the block-finding process
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, 11 Aug 2015 18:55:59 -0000
--089e0122aec8fadceb051d0da670
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
It generally doesn't matter that every node validate your coffee
transaction, and those transactions can and will probably be moved onto
offchain solutions in order to avoid paying the cost of achieving global
consensus. But you still don't get to set the cost of global consensus
artificially. Market forces will ensure that supply will meet demand there,
so if there is demand for access to global consensus, and technology exists
to meet that demand at a cost of one cent per transaction -- or whatever
the technology-limited cost of global consensus happens to be -- then
that's what the market will supply.
It would be like if Amazon suddenly said that they were going to be
charging $5 / gb / month to store data in s3. Can't do it. Technology
exists to bring about cloud storage at $0.01 / GB / month, so they don't
just get to set the price different from the capabilities of technology or
they'll get replaced by a competitor. Same applies to Bitcoin.
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Mark Friedenbach <mark@friedenbach.org>
wrote:
> Michael, why does it matter that every node in the world process and
> validate your morning coffee transaction? Why does it matter to anyone
> except you and the coffee vendor?
>
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Michael Naber via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi Jorge: Many people would like to participate in a global consensus
>> network -- which is a network where all the participating nodes are awar=
e
>> of and agree upon every transaction. Constraining Bitcoin capacity below
>> the limits of technology will only push users seeking to participate in =
a
>> global consensus network to other solutions which have adequate capacity=
,
>> such as BitcoinXT or others. Note that lightning / hub and spoke do not
>> meet requirements for users wishing to participate in global consensus,
>> because they are not global consensus networks, since all participating
>> nodes are not aware of all transactions.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 12:47 PM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 11, 2015 12:14 AM, "Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev" <
>>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On Monday 10. August 2015 13.55.03 Jorge Tim=C3=B3n via bitcoin-dev w=
rote:
>>> > > Gavin, I interpret the absence of response to these questions as a
>>> > > sign that everybody agrees that there's no other reason to increas=
e
>>> > > the consensus block size other than to avoid minimum market fees fr=
om
>>> > > rising (above zero).
>>> > > Feel free to correct that notion at any time by answering the
>>> > > questions yourself.
>>> > > In fact if any other "big block size advocate" thinks there's more
>>> > > reason I would like to hear their reasons too.
>>> >
>>> > See my various emails in the last hour.
>>>
>>> I've read them. I have read gavin's blog posts as well, several times.
>>> I still don't see what else can we fear from not increasing the size
>>> apart from fees maybe rising and making some problems that need to be
>>> solved rewardless of the size more visible (like a dumb unbounded mempo=
ol
>>> design).
>>>
>>> This discussion is frustrating for everyone. I could also say "This hav=
e
>>> been explained many times" and similar things, but that's not productiv=
e.
>>> I'm not trying to be obstinate, please, answer what else is to fear or
>>> admit that all your feas are just potential consequences of rising fees=
.
>>>
>>> With the risk of sounding condescending or aggressive...Really, is not
>>> that hard to answer questions directly and succinctly. We should all be
>>> friends with clarity. Only fear, uncertainty and doubt are enemies of
>>> clarity. But you guys on the "bigger blocks side" don't want to spread =
fud,
>>> do you?
>>> Please, prove paranoid people like me wrong on this point, for the good
>>> of this discussion. I really don't know how else to ask this without
>>> getting a link to something I have already read as a response.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
>>
>
--089e0122aec8fadceb051d0da670
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">It generally doesn't matter that every node validate y=
our coffee transaction, and those transactions can and will probably be mov=
ed onto offchain solutions in order to avoid paying the cost of achieving g=
lobal consensus. But you still don't get to set the cost of global cons=
ensus artificially. Market forces will ensure that supply will meet demand =
there, so if there is demand for access to global consensus, and technology=
exists to meet that demand at a cost of one cent per transaction -- or wha=
tever the technology-limited cost of global consensus happens to be -- then=
that's what the market will supply.<div><br></div><div>It would be lik=
e if Amazon suddenly said that they were going to be charging $5 / gb / mon=
th to store data in s3. Can't do it. Technology exists to bring about c=
loud storage at $0.01 / GB / month, so they don't just get to set the p=
rice different from the capabilities of technology or they'll get repla=
ced by a competitor. Same applies to Bitcoin.</div><div><br></div><div><br>=
</div><div><br></div></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gma=
il_quote">On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Mark Friedenbach <span dir=3D"lt=
r"><<a href=3D"mailto:mark@friedenbach.org" target=3D"_blank">mark@fried=
enbach.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=
=3D"ltr">Michael, why does it matter that every node in the world process a=
nd validate your morning coffee transaction? Why does it matter to anyone e=
xcept you and the coffee vendor?<br></div><div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=
=3D"h5"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Tue, A=
ug 11, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Michael Naber via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr">&l=
t;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank=
">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquot=
e class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc sol=
id;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr">Hi Jorge: Many people would like to p=
articipate in a global consensus network -- which is a network where all th=
e participating nodes are aware of and agree upon every transaction.=C2=A0C=
onstraining Bitcoin capacity below the limits of technology will only push =
users seeking to participate in a global consensus network to other solutio=
ns which have adequate capacity, such as BitcoinXT or others. Note that lig=
htning / hub and spoke do not meet requirements for users wishing to partic=
ipate in global consensus, because they are not global consensus networks, =
since all participating nodes are not aware of all transactions.=C2=A0<div>=
<br></div><div><div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div></div></div><div cl=
ass=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div><div>On Tue, Aug 11=
, 2015 at 12:47 PM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailt=
o:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@list=
s.linuxfoundation.org</a>></span> wrote:<br></div></div><blockquote clas=
s=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;pad=
ding-left:1ex"><div><div><span><p dir=3D"ltr"><br>
On Aug 11, 2015 12:14 AM, "Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev" <<a =
href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bit=
coin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> On Monday 10. August 2015 13.55.03 Jorge Tim=C3=B3n via bitcoin-dev wr=
ote:<br>
> > Gavin, I interpret the absence of response to these questions as =
a<br>
> > sign that everybody agrees that=C2=A0 there's no other reason=
to increase<br>
> > the consensus block size other than to avoid minimum market fees =
from<br>
> > rising (above zero).<br>
> > Feel free to correct that notion at any time by answering the<br>
> > questions yourself.<br>
> > In fact if any other "big block size advocate" thinks t=
here's more<br>
> > reason I would like to hear their reasons too.<br>
><br>
> See my various emails in the last hour.</p>
</span><p dir=3D"ltr">I've read them. I have read gavin's blog post=
s as well, several times.<br>
I still don't see what else can we fear from not increasing the size ap=
art from fees maybe rising and making some problems that need to be solved =
rewardless of the size more visible (like a dumb unbounded mempool design).=
</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">This discussion is frustrating for everyone. I could also sa=
y "This have been explained many times" and similar things, but t=
hat's not productive.<br>
I'm not trying to be obstinate, please, answer what else is to fear or =
admit that all your feas are just potential consequences of rising fees.</p=
>
<p dir=3D"ltr">With the risk of sounding condescending or aggressive...Real=
ly, is not that hard to answer questions directly and succinctly. We should=
all be friends with clarity. Only fear, uncertainty and doubt are enemies =
of clarity. But you guys on the "bigger blocks side" don't wa=
nt to spread fud, do you?<br>
Please, prove paranoid people like me wrong on this point, for the good of =
this discussion. I really don't know how else to ask this without getti=
ng a link to something I have already read as a response.<br>
</p>
<br></div></div><span>_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
<br></span></blockquote></div><br></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
--089e0122aec8fadceb051d0da670--
|
