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
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1YqMQv-0002qo-2S
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 07 May 2015 14:05:49 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.212.179 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.212.179; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
helo=mail-wi0-f179.google.com;
Received: from mail-wi0-f179.google.com ([209.85.212.179])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1YqMQt-0002rm-Eq
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 07 May 2015 14:05:49 +0000
Received: by wicmx19 with SMTP id mx19so14722814wic.1
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Thu, 07 May 2015 07:05:41 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.61.82 with SMTP id n18mr7502660wjr.35.1431007541349;
Thu, 07 May 2015 07:05:41 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.194.90.114 with HTTP; Thu, 7 May 2015 07:05:41 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABm2gDqd6iHRUDKZWWTudcC1QkYa+rCuHjz7pMC2K1Db8wpgfA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <554A91BE.6060105@bluematt.me>
<CANEZrP3wGWHdz+ut6pvke5TJJsc1rTFt8sn2KziX35oL5LAsyg@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDpDvk2VsQ+mJ-BoeBKmvu9jBXNujZEFKuCStRNjFL6VOA@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP2zAGCCBhNa4=9yw+A_Dn5o4SQXoPTE_qcJzZ1dFuF2tw@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDqd6iHRUDKZWWTudcC1QkYa+rCuHjz7pMC2K1Db8wpgfA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 16:05:41 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: kIn6c-jp65imki3ectCjTXEKEXI
Message-ID: <CANEZrP1CU0kB0vXeXUX1L8byaT-Zf2xg+3N+GeNthi_i6bn1qw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7ba977802c53fb05157e689b
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(mh.in.england[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1YqMQt-0002rm-Eq
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 May 2015 14:05:49 -0000
--047d7ba977802c53fb05157e689b
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> If his explanation was "I will change my mind after we increase block
>
size", I guess the community should say "then we will just ignore your
> nack because it makes no sense".
>
Oh good! We can just kick anyone out of the consensus process if we think
they make no sense.
I guess that means me and Gavin can remove everyone else from the developer
consensus, because we think trying to stop Bitcoin growing makes no sense.
Do you see the problem with this whole notion? It cannot possibly work.
Whenever you try and make the idea of developer consensus work, what you
end up with is "I believe in consensus as long as it goes my way". Which is
worthless.
> One thing is the Bitcoin core project where you could argue that the 5
> committers decide (I don't know why Wladimir would have any more
> authority than the others).
>
Because he is formally the maintainer.
Maybe you dislike that idea. It's so .... centralised. So let's say Gavin
commits his patch, because his authority is equal to all other committers.
Someone else rolls it back. Gavin sets up a cron job to keep committing the
patch. Game over.
You cannot have committers fighting over what goes in and what doesn't.
That's madness. There must be a single decision maker for any given
codebase.
> Ok, so in simple terms, you expect people to have to pay enormous fees
> and/or wait thousands of blocks for their transactions to get included
> in the chain. Is that correct?
>
No. I'll write an article like the others, it's better than email for more
complicated discourse.
As others have said, if the answer is "forever, adoption is always the most
> important thing" then we will end up with an improved version of Visa.
>
This appears to be another one of those fundamental areas of disagreement.
I believe there is no chance of Bitcoin ending up like Visa, even if it is
wildly successful. I did the calculations years ago that show that won't
happen:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability
Decentralisation is a spectrum and Bitcoin will move around on that
spectrum over time. But claiming we have to pick between 1mb blocks and
"Bitcoin = VISA" is silly.
Peter: your hypocrisy really is bottomless, isn't it? You constantly
claim to be a Righteous Defender of Privacy, but don't even hesitate before
publishing hacked private emails when it suits you.
Satoshi's hacker had no illusions about your horrible personality, which is
why he forwarded that email to you specifically. He knew you'd use it. You
should reflect on that fact. It says nothing good about you at all.
--047d7ba977802c53fb05157e689b
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"><blo=
ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left=
-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;paddi=
ng-left:1ex">If his explanation was "I will change my mind after we in=
crease block<br></blockquote><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"mar=
gin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,2=
04);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
size", I guess the community should say "then we will just ignore=
your<br>
nack because it makes no sense".<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>O=
h good! We can just kick anyone out of the consensus process if we think th=
ey make no sense.</div><div><br></div><div>I guess that means me and Gavin =
can remove everyone else from the developer consensus, because we think try=
ing to stop Bitcoin growing makes no sense.</div><div><br></div><div>Do you=
see the problem with this whole notion? It cannot possibly work. Whenever =
you try and make the idea of developer consensus work, what you end up with=
is "I believe in consensus as long as it goes my way". Which is =
worthless.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D=
"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,2=
04,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">One thing is the Bitcoin =
core project where you could argue that the 5<br>
committers decide (I don't know why Wladimir would have any more<br>
authority than the others).<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Because he =
is formally the maintainer.</div><div><br></div><div>Maybe you dislike that=
idea. It's so .... centralised. So let's say Gavin commits his pat=
ch, because his authority is equal to all other committers. Someone else ro=
lls it back. Gavin sets up a cron job to keep committing the patch. Game ov=
er.</div><div><br></div><div>You cannot have committers fighting over what =
goes in and what doesn't. That's madness. There must be a single de=
cision maker for any given codebase.=C2=A0</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquot=
e class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width=
:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-lef=
t:1ex">Ok, so in simple terms, you expect people to have to pay enormous fe=
es<br>
and/or wait thousands of blocks for their transactions to get included<br>
in the chain.=C2=A0Is that correct?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>No.=
I'll write an article like the others, it's better than email for =
more complicated discourse.</div><div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_=
quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-=
color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">As others =
have said, if the answer is=C2=A0"forever, adoption is always the most=
important thing" then we will=C2=A0end up with an improved version of=
Visa.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>This appears to be another one o=
f those fundamental areas of disagreement. I believe there is no chance of =
Bitcoin ending up like Visa, even if it is wildly successful. I did the cal=
culations years ago that show that won't happen:</div><div><br></div><d=
iv>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <a href=3D"https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability">https:/=
/en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability</a><br></div><div><br></div><div>Decentrali=
sation is a spectrum and Bitcoin will move around on that spectrum over tim=
e. But claiming we have to pick between 1mb blocks and "Bitcoin =3D VI=
SA" is silly.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>P=
eter: =C2=A0 your hypocrisy really is bottomless, isn't it? You constan=
tly claim to be a Righteous Defender of Privacy, but don't even hesitat=
e before publishing hacked private emails when it suits you.</div><div><br>=
</div><div>Satoshi's hacker had no illusions about your horrible person=
ality, which is why he forwarded that email to you specifically. He knew yo=
u'd use it. You should reflect on that fact. It says nothing good about=
you at all.</div><div><br></div></div></div></div>
--047d7ba977802c53fb05157e689b--
|
