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
|
Return-Path: <elombrozo@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2288D16AC
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 20 Sep 2015 22:22:02 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pa0-f46.google.com (mail-pa0-f46.google.com
[209.85.220.46])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B637148
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 20 Sep 2015 22:22:01 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by padhy16 with SMTP id hy16so98276122pad.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 20 Sep 2015 15:22:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:reply-to:user-agent
:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=3XukoOpUGczIyYSq8CyCAXNYkysNgoA6OwPhi1j86tE=;
b=QfdeXNu88ovnDOQL1NMFd/+8LXXiFVo3dxFXkwI3P/nspUzwyD4Of95c7gBWQIFa44
Trp8ieo//mDyZn4AEtDw4GWmP+bR5qcvDi2OHlkfBCypaviKWcmCY7vjFHb0Fyv5+BGD
r4flTe/OVc1p4iNaLUNAvcEnV/5tPmP/jd6xk1SzJKBdesXGWr+vTlEakTojR/CXj1sz
5JzdkveMY1wKRofHdcqJYkhJLqreIJHklgd185n2wEwpGgA45iyF0+dA7QPD2Oij8ekj
VDO+ZiYeLZ4+PGBwI+GDrRW8WQL8koMXYfdxGQLE3FKhF3LX5PDuLWkhOFKsAOnX1js8
PyjA==
X-Received: by 10.68.234.200 with SMTP id ug8mr21082014pbc.13.1442787721318;
Sun, 20 Sep 2015 15:22:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.108] (cpe-76-167-237-202.san.res.rr.com.
[76.167.237.202]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
rb8sm20576556pbb.63.2015.09.20.15.22.00
(version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128);
Sun, 20 Sep 2015 15:22:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Eric Lombrozo" <elombrozo@gmail.com>
To: "Milly Bitcoin" <milly@bitcoins.info>,
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 22:21:55 +0000
Message-Id: <eme6e53f4a-40c6-4b6f-8cf1-b2e8d9905e9d@platinum>
In-Reply-To: <55FF2CF8.2010408@bitcoins.info>
Reply-To: "Eric Lombrozo" <elombrozo@gmail.com>
User-Agent: eM_Client/6.0.23181.0
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM,
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
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Scaling Bitcoin conference micro-report
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: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 22:22:02 -0000
------ Original Message ------
From: "Milly Bitcoin via bitcoin-dev"=20
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Sent: 9/20/2015 3:02:32 PM
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Scaling Bitcoin conference micro-report
>>Larger user base won't necessarily protect against governments if we
>>still have chokepoints they can go after.
>
>
>Bitcoin will always have chokepoints governments can go after. Hackers=
=20
>already targeted routers to divert mining traffic awhile back. Bitcoin=
=20
>traffic is easily seen and blocked by ISP's. It has already been=20
>pointed out that laws against merchants and exchanges cannot be=20
>defended against any other way than to have many people use the system.
Almost none of these merchants depend on Bitcoin in any significant way=20
for revenue...and that's likely to remain the case for a good while.=20
Merchants that have chosen to accept Bitcoin are typically using a=20
handful of payment processors, again...chokepoints. And almost none of=20
them are contributing any network resources back to Bitcoin.
Exchanges are indeed serious chokepoints. But increasing the number of=20
users will probably have relatively little effect on this unless we also=
=20
increase the number of exchanges and decentralize the exchanges. If all=20
we had to do is increase the number of users, the same argument could be=
=20
used to claim that banks would be less susceptible to governmental=20
crackdowns if they just had more account holders.
Exchange decentralization is indeed another thing we must work towards -=
=20
but that's probably beyond the scope of the more pressing issue which is=
=20
building consensus in Bitcoin development.
>(As a developer you, of course, did not mention the threat of having a=20
>tiny number of developers who have significant influence over Bitcoin. =
=20
>It always amazes me the endless discussion over miners centralization=20
>and almost zero discussion of developer decentralization.)
I've pointed out this weakness of Bitcoin *numerous* times. That I=20
failed to mention it here does not mean it hasn't been discussed=20
elsewhere. Some of us have also been actively working towards developing=
=20
a more modular, layered architecture and better implementations that=20
will afford greater decentralization in software development with less=20
need for critical code reviews, less pushback from downstream developers=
=20
who must continuously rebase, a better process for building consensus in=
=20
the community, and simpler app migration.
>
>
>Increasing the nodes by a factor of 2 or 3 or keeping the block size=20
>small to increase the diversity of miners by a few percent will have=20
>zero effect if those other government threats were to actually happen.
>
We need to increase the basic infrastructure nodes by a factor much=20
larger than 2 or 3...more like 100 or 1000...and it's entirely doable=20
with properly aligned incentives.
>Russ
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>bitcoin-dev mailing list
>bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
|
