summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/9a/588fd2970bde8e7bfda4bfcb2925af053af000
blob: 20ab051789982d2eedd2220d60d1c2d4e8fcad86 (plain)
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
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
Return-Path: <elombrozo@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5DAE8273
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sat, 27 Jun 2015 02:54:51 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pa0-f43.google.com (mail-pa0-f43.google.com
	[209.85.220.43])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 93953108
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sat, 27 Jun 2015 02:54:50 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by padev16 with SMTP id ev16so77270273pad.0
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Fri, 26 Jun 2015 19:54:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc
	:message-id:references:to;
	bh=Rr25zCErpr2Oo+Dafp2xSUmCPfWXWZhI4mc5N4bRFhk=;
	b=ZkCt9S8TCSRE7mjXPjDrhst858DPLJMbLfPySBkr44uvioqPZPYkIY8ezgDzwv0eyA
	+atI/ErpuyJK++yzp75IC6XkYt++HXQac9i+Q5BeVlhwOnXFtL6Lt66iHSBjmI7KK4pD
	fwPUGYFZHVPuyH2eDIeZvQO6ysnB/Jye0RVm0/P14+pBepG4Br3Q+t+ixPpxxFBatDWV
	qadl6bOH51m79NlgBQ3XgrJXURc3HtbMI7L25eGg+VEQ+4sZGTGjfSpZDe4ooOvqQStU
	GeAHECJMJseKkfiRvYOSEo3b8aTzXQwb5FSRMHdBsGEfOdKZ6YjP02Pr4cP5RG/eIObi
	CO8w==
X-Received: by 10.68.250.194 with SMTP id ze2mr9411923pbc.24.1435373690343;
	Fri, 26 Jun 2015 19:54:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.102] (cpe-76-167-237-202.san.res.rr.com.
	[76.167.237.202]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id
	eu5sm34985603pac.37.2015.06.26.19.54.38
	(version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
	Fri, 26 Jun 2015 19:54:48 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2098\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
	boundary="Apple-Mail=_FAF2319A-A612-4E0B-9796-E8AE26AC34F8";
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.5b6
From: Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <2107342B-1D9E-4575-B7E4-3B69D51B1A17@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 19:54:37 -0700
Message-Id: <2C8D5EFF-AB1E-4003-A264-707CAF7CA1F4@gmail.com>
References: <CAPg+sBjOj9eXiDG0F6G54SVKkStF_1HRu2wzGqtFF5X_NAWy4w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADm_Wca+ow4pMzN7SyKjsMdFo0wuUerYYjf5xKs5G_2Q2PzMmA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPg+sBg=sn7djO_8H16NDg7S7m7_0eTcrgLVofMWQ2ANz+jw9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADm_WcbQog_UCV=JPHyqTRxKbaGY7jedtHE_D8jJSe_thMg05w@mail.gmail.com>
	<558DB997.4030209@phauna.org>
	<2107342B-1D9E-4575-B7E4-3B69D51B1A17@gmail.com>
To: Owen Gunden <ogunden@phauna.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2098)
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE,
	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 02:54:51 -0000


--Apple-Mail=_FAF2319A-A612-4E0B-9796-E8AE26AC34F8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8

I should add that a strategy of =E2=80=9Clet=E2=80=99s avoid fee =
pressure as much as possible. let=E2=80=99s avoid even thinking about =
how we=E2=80=99ll transition as much as possible.=E2=80=9D strikes me as =
at least a tad bit myopic.

- Eric Lombrozo

> On Jun 26, 2015, at 7:18 PM, Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>=20
> I=E2=80=99ve been pondering this whole scale issue considerably=E2=80=A6=
and am left with the conclusion that blockchains are ultimately dispute =
resolution mechanisms. The vast majority of crypto negotiation will be =
taking place at levels lesser than global consensus in the future - =
global consensus is just far too expensive to require for every single =
cappuccino. There really is little need to take most cases =
globally=E2=80=A6unless the participants disagree. I=E2=80=99ve =
commented in other places that blockchains are essentially a =E2=80=9Cfix=E2=
=80=9D to the prisoner=E2=80=99s dilemma - they make cooperation the =
equilibrium strategy.
>=20
> Regardless of whatever linear factor we scale the blockchain by, it is =
simple math to see that any exponential growth (even if for a short =
time) in usage will overwhelm the current network. If we ever intend to =
take bitcoin mainstream, we will most likely experience at least a short =
time of exponential growth=E2=80=A6at least until we either reach an =
inherent limitation or until we saturate. As Pieter said earlier, FAPP =
right now the demand for payments might as well be infinite. We=E2=80=99re=
 nowhere near the ability to service it all.
>=20
> The block size issue is really a usability issue at this point. There =
are two fundamental things we need to solve:
>=20
> 1) There=E2=80=99s no model for how we=E2=80=99ll introduce a fee =
market, even though the design of Bitcoin fundamentally depends on fees =
for its survival (at least in the current form of the design.)
>=20
> 2) There=E2=80=99s no mechanism for how to perform fee bidding and =
estimation. Most wallets simply have no way to do this without serious =
usability problems.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> If we=E2=80=99re going to talk about block fees, let=E2=80=99s keep it =
in the context of these relevant issues and not confound it with the =
scalability issue=E2=80=A6these are two very different issues.
>=20
>=20
> - Eric Lombrozo
>=20
>=20
>> On Jun 26, 2015, at 1:44 PM, Owen Gunden <ogunden@phauna.org> wrote:
>>=20
>> On 06/26/2015 02:23 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>> Failure to plan now for a hard fork increase 6(?) months in the =
future
>>> produces that lumpy, unpredictable market behavior.
>>>=20
>>> The market has baked in the years-long behavior of low fees.  =46rom =
the
>>> market PoV, inaction does lead to precisely that, a sudden change =
over
>>> the span of a few months.
>>=20
>> Which market participants are you referring to?
>>=20
>> I entered the bitcoin market with open eyes, aware that it faces hard =
scalability challenges by design. I was also aware that because of these =
challenges, eventually transaction fees would have to rise.
>>=20
>> Nevertheless, I made the decision to invest because of the utility I =
gain from the anti-censorship, privacy, control, store of value, and =
security aspects of bitcoin -- many of which stem from decentralization, =
which others have demonstrated to be linked to the block size.
>>=20
>> On the other hand, there are undoubtedly other market participants =
who heard hype about "zero fee transactions to anywhere in the world", =
believed it would scale, and made (mal)investments as a result.
>>=20
>> As for how many market participants of each flavor, and how deep =
their respective pockets, who knows? My experience in markets has lead =
me to realize that it's never wise to assume I know what "the market" =
does and doesn't know. If Jeff Garzik is right about what the market has =
priced in, then yes, filled blocks will be rocking the boat. But who's =
to say that the smartest, biggest investors and traders don't already =
see this scaling problem, and have already priced it in? In this case, a =
sudden large increase in the block size is actually rocking the boat. =
The point is, you can't know either way, so trying to pre-empt the =
market in this way is erroneous.
>>=20
>> Regarding entrepreneurial investment specifically, why should we =
favor the entrepreneurs who require a more centralized bitcoin over =
those who were more considerate of the possibility of rising transaction =
fees when making their business models?
>>=20
>> In my mind, we should favor neither, which is why I'm basically in =
agreement with Pieter that this sense of "emergency" shouldn't really be =
a part of the debate.
>>=20
>> Not that I'm taking a stand on the specific block size issue either =
way. I just think this particular line of reasoning (presupposing what =
information the market has and has not already baked in) is unsound.
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>=20


--Apple-Mail=_FAF2319A-A612-4E0B-9796-E8AE26AC34F8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
	name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org
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=6mMo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Apple-Mail=_FAF2319A-A612-4E0B-9796-E8AE26AC34F8--