path: root/72/1216c933a019dc70511a8d222b0cc4875376b1

Return-Path: <vjudeu@gazeta.pl>
Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136])
 by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 999EEC0032
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Tue,  7 Nov 2023 08:58:55 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E31461392
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Tue,  7 Nov 2023 08:58:55 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org 6E31461392
Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org;
 dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gazeta.pl header.i=@gazeta.pl
 header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=2013 header.b=ULC82IxB
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.604
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.604 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
 DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
 HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001,
 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,
 SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (smtp3.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id yQA6wFTk2_VJ
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Tue,  7 Nov 2023 08:58:54 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtpo93.poczta.onet.pl (smtpo93.poczta.onet.pl
 [213.180.149.146])
 by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7AE161320
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Tue,  7 Nov 2023 08:58:53 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org E7AE161320
Received: from pmq7v.m5r2.onet (pmq7v.m5r2.onet [10.174.35.192])
 by smtp.poczta.onet.pl (Onet) with ESMTP id 4SPhw53tfPz1srX;
 Tue,  7 Nov 2023 09:58:45 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gazeta.pl; s=2013;
 t=1699347525; bh=TU1UALjXd9FqJmIToa/pe1UH8i1QXmFIEJ+CV9f+7fI=;
 h=From:To:Date:Subject:From;
 b=ULC82IxBxXZ0XYTUipPEpuzec8O8zxib8MrArZmWRgISfA9ad85QOdQZSTOry5dKm
 e+U9KgJXTH+UGpi51UtI7q3K2ZJZN7PVL+xgIQ9Vac5Clf90H+/2jDDFQi210ZSLH0
 9tX40KEE2gXcE5Theys+3UY2y0XiAOpjDAxscAI0=
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="===============7634197064950630424=="
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: from [5.173.249.32] by pmq7v.m5r2.onet via HTTP id ;
 Tue, 07 Nov 2023 09:58:45 +0100
From: vjudeu@gazeta.pl
X-Priority: 3
To: JK <jk_14@op.pl>,
 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
 Erik Aronesty <erik@q32.com>,
 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2023 09:58:44 +0100
Message-Id: <194638433-36890bea95b2ebab3a168daf3c806e8f@pmq7v.m5r2.onet>
X-Mailer: onet.poczta
X-Onet-PMQ: <vjudeu@gazeta.pl>;5.173.249.32;PL;3
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 07 Nov 2023 11:42:54 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] ossification and misaligned incentive concerns
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol 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, 07 Nov 2023 08:58:55 -0000

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============7634197064950630424==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

> Imagine a system that tries to maintain a constant level of difficulty an=
d reacts flexibly to changes in difficulty, by modulating the block reward =
level accordingly (using negative feedback).
=C2=A0
This is exactly what I did, when experimenting with LN-based mining. CPU po=
wer was too low to get a full block reward out of that. But getting single =
millisatoshis from a channel partner? This is possible, and I started desig=
ning my model from that assumption. Also, because channel partner usually d=
on't want to explicitly pay, I created it in a form of "LN transaction fee =
discount". Which means, a CPU miner just received cheaper LN transactions t=
hrough the channel partner, instead of getting paid explicitly. Which also =
caused better network connectivity, because then you have an upper bound fo=
r your mining (it won't be cheaper LN transaction than for free). Which mea=
ns, if you mine so many shares, that you have free LN transactions, then yo=
u have to sell them, or open another channel, and then instead of having "o=
ne channel with free transactions", you have many.
=C2=A0
> The free market is more important than finite supply.
=C2=A0
I would say, the backward compatibility is more important than increased (n=
o matter if still constant or not) supply. Which means, you can "increase" =
the supply, just by introducing millisatoshis on-chain. Or add any "tail su=
pply", or anything like that, what was discussed in the past. The only thin=
g that matters is: can you make it compatible with the current system? Hard=
-fork will be instantly rejected, without any discussion. Soft-fork will be=
 stopped at best, exactly in the same way, how other soft-fork proposals we=
re stopped, when achieving consensus was hard, and the topic was controvers=
ial. So, what is left? Of course no-forks and second layers. This is the on=
ly way, that is wide-open today, and which requires no support from the com=
munity. And that's why Ordinals are so strong: because they are a no-fork. =
Better or worse designed, it doesn't matter, but still a no-fork. Which mea=
ns, they exist in the wild, no matter if you like them or not.
--===============7634197064950630424==
Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div>&gt; Imagine a system that tries to maintain a constant level of diffi=
culty and reacts flexibly to changes in difficulty, by modulating the block=
 reward level accordingly (using negative feedback).</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>This is exactly what I did, when experimenting with LN-based mining. C=
PU power was too low to get a full block reward out of that. But getting si=
ngle millisatoshis from a channel partner? This is possible, and I started =
designing my model from that assumption. Also, because channel partner usua=
lly don't want to explicitly pay, I created it in a form of "LN transaction=
 fee discount". Which means, a CPU miner just received cheaper LN transacti=
ons through the channel partner, instead of getting paid explicitly. Which =
also caused better network connectivity, because then you have an upper bou=
nd for your mining (it won't be cheaper LN transaction than for free). Whic=
h means, if you mine so many shares, that you have free LN transactions, th=
en you have to sell them, or open another channel, and then instead of havi=
ng "one channel with free transactions", you have many.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>&gt; The free market is more important than finite supply.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>I would say, the backward compatibility is more important than increas=
ed (no matter if still constant or not) supply. Which means, you can "incre=
ase" the supply, just by introducing millisatoshis on-chain. Or add any "ta=
il supply", or anything like that, what was discussed in the past. The only=
 thing that matters is: can you make it compatible with the current system?=
 Hard-fork will be instantly rejected, without any discussion. Soft-fork wi=
ll be stopped at best, exactly in the same way, how other soft-fork proposa=
ls were stopped, when achieving consensus was hard, and the topic was contr=
oversial. So, what is left? Of course no-forks and second layers. This is t=
he only way, that is wide-open today, and which requires no support from th=
e community. And that's why Ordinals are so strong: because they are a no-f=
ork. Better or worse designed, it doesn't matter, but still a no-fork. Whic=
h means, they exist in the wild, no matter if you like them or not.</div>

--===============7634197064950630424==--