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
|
Return-Path: <laanwj@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BB87B88
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 27 Jun 2015 10:04:02 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wg0-f46.google.com (mail-wg0-f46.google.com [74.125.82.46])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B0ABFB
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 27 Jun 2015 10:04:01 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wgjx7 with SMTP id x7so32420827wgj.2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 27 Jun 2015 03:04:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version
:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent;
bh=Du3og5SO0+JaKNycrDMA1TNFjST/816eNQLB38/cVIM=;
b=FSrnRnG5gPS/CnunMGIeZy051/bFzaYCkMpTNkdhER/C0xRUOM3eMZUpexzy8bWQry
ctcHmqmjB6Mgn+A3F2TrmhhSQ06jWLcKPhMA20ghU8VyXoOjl1hXzg+YKdjTh1T0r1yp
VTIXZda4GrO+MBbc751VaXwgMYzUhAzC+zjKQWLSowG5tbNJWMiTtR02hd/AX1yakUtj
7UklwdngrqEhf6mSDiDj/upiNluCZhv2bAE/m1xgNNW+7RrOuR2PTjgwdkoka8vlgMaD
Fy9dvyTyj137V/Z2W6e2uT046DOG7Kl6HM2qTHR+CeQR+gTs8/fplAExxeUVTowtccoC
3N5w==
X-Received: by 10.194.248.227 with SMTP id yp3mr11304279wjc.32.1435399440249;
Sat, 27 Jun 2015 03:04:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from amethyst.visucore.com (dhcp-089-098-228-253.chello.nl.
[89.98.228.253])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id q9sm2297733wiz.23.2015.06.27.03.03.58
(version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
Sat, 27 Jun 2015 03:03:59 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 12:04:01 +0200
From: "Wladimir J. van der Laan" <laanwj@gmail.com>
To: NxtChg <nxtchg@hush.com>
Message-ID: <20150627100400.GC25420@amethyst.visucore.com>
References: <CAPg+sBjOj9eXiDG0F6G54SVKkStF_1HRu2wzGqtFF5X_NAWy4w@mail.gmail.com>
<20150627074259.GA25420@amethyst.visucore.com>
<20150627095501.C59B541A40@smtp.hushmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150627095501.C59B541A40@smtp.hushmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
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
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] The need for larger blocks
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: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 10:04:02 -0000
On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 12:55:01PM +0300, NxtChg wrote:
>
> > They cannot be changed willy-nilly according to needs of some groups, much less than lower gravity can be legislated to help the airline industry.
>
> Except the block size is not gravity. It's more like an arbitrary decision to limit planes' wingspan to the most typical hangar door of 1940.
>
> And now we have a "controversy" that we can't have modern planes out of the fear they won't fit into some of the old hangars.
>
> And to continue with this nice example, some people are even arguing that "the demand for flight is, essentially, limitless, so why bother making larger jets at all?"
At least there's always an 'exit' option. At this point it would be more realistic to create a sidechain, or altcoin with larger blocks, and not experiment with the current one in-flight. Then you won't risk the other 'passengers' who don't consent to it.
It's important to face reality instead of being wishful here. I'd also have preferred to have one happy family, but it is clear that is not the case, and pretending is only going to cause damage by creating false expectations, or eventually even double-spending possibility because of conflicting forks.
Wladimir
|
