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
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1Sj4un-0007v3-T6
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 25 Jun 2012 08:44:57 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 74.125.82.175 as permitted sender)
client-ip=74.125.82.175; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
helo=mail-we0-f175.google.com;
Received: from mail-we0-f175.google.com ([74.125.82.175])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Sj4un-0001Ho-8l
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 25 Jun 2012 08:44:57 +0000
Received: by werg55 with SMTP id g55so2860371wer.34
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Mon, 25 Jun 2012 01:44:51 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.142.200 with SMTP id i50mr6367951wej.47.1340613890986;
Mon, 25 Jun 2012 01:44:50 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.216.254.232 with HTTP; Mon, 25 Jun 2012 01:44:50 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4FE7458E.2020908@justmoon.de>
References: <CANEZrP0nagdAXyMEY5yxyXBjdo78YC16mjUG9=b0AMe4qOS=fA@mail.gmail.com>
<4FE7458E.2020908@justmoon.de>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 10:44:50 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: Dlor51hVBhSxD1lDJiHhnSfGQyg
Message-ID: <CANEZrP1DyCn0cFdPjohgFoyux17_RmNh6Fk=8kpO1R1Cr0YFGg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Stefan Thomas <moon@justmoon.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-)
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
(mh.in.england[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
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: 1Sj4un-0001Ho-8l
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Enforcing inflation rules for SPV clients
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, 25 Jun 2012 08:44:58 -0000
> Very interesting for you to bring this up. I had a similar idea for a
> totally different use case. Greg recently pointed out an interesting
> dilemma saying that (significantly) larger blocks would lead to
> centralization.
Yeah. I am still unsure that this really holds. Bitcoin moves fast,
but even so, unless there are a few more SatoshiDice-like events and
the way people use transactions changes dramatically we're a long way
from gigabyte sized blocks. And once we get there, technology will
probably have improved to the point where it doesn't seem like a big
deal anymore.
Of course we have debated this many times already. Maybe again at the
next meetup :-)
|
