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
|
Return-Path: <kanzure@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E4DB5AE
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 30 Jul 2015 16:36:32 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-lb0-f169.google.com (mail-lb0-f169.google.com
[209.85.217.169])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32589211
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 30 Jul 2015 16:36:31 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by lbbyj8 with SMTP id yj8so30720103lbb.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 30 Jul 2015 09:36:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:content-type; bh=bBFzooy8QcmLzHzV4nAl4X7J0fb4auje9IVPM6pjmw4=;
b=dFV/Pn/CdJPlPq6XC0c0pB+OyNF42Vgk4i4TmZPnAFYKTrPpt2+P/8RderUOgd8rZ3
aXPwMqH/kNl2wYb62dQt6OwDHpYfWHZYkeH/Dsz0RC6cFKJxK3KOd6qm5lQQJo/Mhsl0
78imNOdRbhwdGqGUIkGuGoDeQYfqR0WslkdqPFpgPm3IxMd+gYZfO1vrHmCLdRZib9Fu
pcLslty8Wl99oSgFKkWUvN6l4kTW0Kz0pqDKcIhMdLRX8L9m59kcVrFcXrXF7acr1YPp
GVFeI9AgO74mKePlp1Rx1pCXUo8pG0Ryt8AgLz9hFHtasERxiyM13zAB0KptVuyxAo1M
t1Iw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.13.97 with SMTP id g1mr45454351lbc.52.1438274189604;
Thu, 30 Jul 2015 09:36:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.152.18.166 with HTTP; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 09:36:29 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CADL_X_f5nVFCmwNTAtJ6xTdB62wKc+FJdWCHVza9ran2NzaTmw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPg+sBj-wA1DMrwkQRWnzQoB5NR-q=2-5=WDAAUYfSpXRZSTqw@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDrHjfkC+whh3Vh2LZNdSR1WSAXpNitR-jEdxtbKj7J25g@mail.gmail.com>
<CADL_X_f5nVFCmwNTAtJ6xTdB62wKc+FJdWCHVza9ran2NzaTmw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 11:36:29 -0500
Message-ID: <CABaSBayrjD+GWj6yJR6Xsbd7QTBECBKemX89sFw2_xQOkH=p-Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Bryan Bishop <kanzure@gmail.com>
To: Jameson Lopp <jameson.lopp@gmail.com>, Bryan Bishop <kanzure@gmail.com>,
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3b208293d9b051c1a4e69
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,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] Block size following technological growth
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: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 16:36:32 -0000
--001a11c3b208293d9b051c1a4e69
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Jameson Lopp via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Stated differently, if the cost or contention of using the network rises
> to the point of excluding the average user from making transactions, then
> they probably aren't going to care that they can run a node at trivial cost.
That's an interesting claim; so suppose you're living in a future where
transactions are summarizing millions or billions of other daily
transactions, possibly with merkle hashes. You think that because a user
can't individually broadcast his own personal transaction, that the user
would not be interested in verifying the presence of a summarizing
transaction in the blockchain? I'm just curious if you could elaborate on
this effect. Why would I need to see my individual transactions on the
network, but not see aggregate transactions that include my own?
- Bryan
http://heybryan.org/
1 512 203 0507
--001a11c3b208293d9b051c1a4e69
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On T=
hu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Jameson Lopp via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr=
"><<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_b=
lank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><block=
quote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc=
solid;padding-left:1ex">Stated differently, if the cost or contention of u=
sing the network rises to the point of excluding the average user from maki=
ng transactions, then they probably aren't going to care that they can =
run a node at trivial cost.</blockquote></div><br>That's an interesting=
claim; so suppose you're living in a future where transactions are sum=
marizing millions or billions of other daily transactions, possibly with me=
rkle hashes. You think that because a user can't individually broadcast=
his own personal transaction, that the user would not be interested in ver=
ifying the presence of a summarizing transaction in the blockchain? I'm=
just curious if you could elaborate on this effect. Why would I need to se=
e my individual transactions on the network, but not see aggregate transact=
ions that include my own?<br><div><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_signature">=
- Bryan<br><a href=3D"http://heybryan.org/" target=3D"_blank">http://heybry=
an.org/</a><br>1 512 203 0507</div>
</div></div>
--001a11c3b208293d9b051c1a4e69--
|
