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
|
Return-Path: <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6824FFF
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 24 Aug 2015 02:27:05 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-la0-f49.google.com (mail-la0-f49.google.com
[209.85.215.49])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B2EF0106
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 24 Aug 2015 02:27:04 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by labgv11 with SMTP id gv11so854007lab.2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 23 Aug 2015 19:27:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
bh=Wny4wzqkX4Nv9XDRrKgaOMBujtojEAny6/hbbV5WrB8=;
b=WFHCPimaI8Y0U1JqfxBmJIO9qTOIAisVXZCCthaVgV+3a4RmctqgPcMIUBihEnf+fF
zoEpEkwQuOLT40sJV4x4MKyiG8wrxq/Oa51UPJYIIe+kBIxgEmzxwEWOmZZeierRrS1F
IF5T6LXaivtmg5HVFl7aNR2ywwUP7ZVeNpDJcUNWkMcgi5CupgsfZcGpw7njBPMhnBzI
bFO2dNWphMtsv7Le3bjJR/sbnDKJfcHJCgw/LluGOXpyMz0E7jL7Bcp5gBbWpiMw/0wp
hjBlKHdYOlmdLkxZG8abTWRGU7w6GkSKRGz4sAbL7edTcphhSOe6MCcmUR6LUXWxiT9k
OfQQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmxBQz/zgyE9TQ6Str+koCtQ3nbOYSAMfO0Q7waocfqBO3zfEDt2gGiNS13rv6nVFdxkIUY
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.156.168 with SMTP id wf8mr18108164lbb.114.1440383223091;
Sun, 23 Aug 2015 19:27:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.25.15.22 with HTTP; Sun, 23 Aug 2015 19:27:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <55DA5A1C.8080105@thinlink.com>
References: <CAED3CWgTOMFgaM6bBfU0Dn-R0NrdrhGAQo34wHEneYkTtB4Opg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAEieSeSw04FYCCa-Df+V6BgJo1RHqPvJWt9t=c-JCC=dnhraWA@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDp0o5DBzuoyZ=SFvnBXTwPYFWhdOqUPkP_M_3koNMVP1g@mail.gmail.com>
<55D5AA8E.7070403@bitcoins.info> <55D67017.9000106@thinlink.com>
<20150821003751.GA19230@muck> <55D7575B.6030505@thinlink.com>
<20150821222153.GD7450@muck> <55D7B157.904@thinlink.com>
<20150822000127.GA5679@muck> <55DA5A1C.8080105@thinlink.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 04:27:02 +0200
Message-ID: <CABm2gDojSnZTsXk2XNGi5pAPmBSvRXm5VsZ4PfWOPHby-VbfWQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
To: Tom Harding <tomh@thinlink.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,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] Dynamically Controlled Bitcoin Block Size Max Cap
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: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 02:27:05 -0000
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 1:41 AM, Tom Harding via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On 8/21/2015 5:01 PM, Peter Todd wrote:
>>
>>> I checked the scenario where only the radio is on, and found the car
>>> does not crash.
>> Incidentally, what's your acceptable revenue difference between a small
>> (1% hashing power) and large (%30 hashing power) miner, all else being
>> equal? (remember that we shouldn't preclude variance reduction
>> techniques such as p2pool and pooled-solo mode)
>>
>> Equally, what kind of attacks on miners do you think we need to be able to
>> resist? E.g. DoS attacks, hacking, etc.
>>
>
> None of this is in the scope of Pieter's simulation.
>
> If you think that casts doubt on my conclusions, then it casts doubt on
> his original conclusions as well.
As far as I know, "his conclusions" were that there was an effect,
while suspending judgement on whether that effect was high enough to
be important for a given size or not.
|
