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
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <kgreenek@gmail.com>) id 1Z4ht5-000191-8F
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 16 Jun 2015 03:50:11 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 74.125.82.43 as permitted sender)
client-ip=74.125.82.43; envelope-from=kgreenek@gmail.com;
helo=mail-wg0-f43.google.com;
Received: from mail-wg0-f43.google.com ([74.125.82.43])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Z4ht4-0005SN-Aw
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 16 Jun 2015 03:50:11 +0000
Received: by wgzl5 with SMTP id l5so2920431wgz.3
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Mon, 15 Jun 2015 20:50:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.180.187.41 with SMTP id fp9mr1893925wic.67.1434426604355;
Mon, 15 Jun 2015 20:50:04 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.27.20.1 with HTTP; Mon, 15 Jun 2015 20:49:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <201506160341.10994.luke@dashjr.org>
References: <CALqxMTHrnSS9MGgKO-5+=fVhiOOvk12Recs11S0PcSUxQT1wdQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+c4Zoy6U9RXH3Qw15sXXnaeYL-9PFbnTp=VLAJsvpC_zoAK_A@mail.gmail.com>
<CAEY8wq41ftFA1ObyUWiRGOgebwqDCAw_j+hU6_wfcXv5GSZaJw@mail.gmail.com>
<201506160341.10994.luke@dashjr.org>
From: Kevin Greene <kgreenek@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 20:49:43 -0700
Message-ID: <CAEY8wq4SOddGUJNqkrdhhfQEn4tXehCWiifk-P=PYUdfFcXFTQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3844c3585cb05189a78f1
X-Spam-Score: -0.1 (/)
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
(kgreenek[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
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
0.5 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
X-Headers-End: 1Z4ht4-0005SN-Aw
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] The Bitcoin Node Market
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: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 03:50:11 -0000
--001a11c3844c3585cb05189a78f1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 8:41 PM, Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 16, 2015 3:30:44 AM Kevin Greene wrote:
> > Would SPV wallets have to pay to connect to the network too? From the
> > user's perspective, it would be somewhat upsetting (and confusing) to s=
ee
> > your balance slowly draining every time you open your wallet app. It
> would
> > also tie up outputs every time you open up your wallet. You may go to p=
ay
> > for something in a coffee shop, only to find that you can't spend your
> > bitcoin because the wallet had to create a transaction to pay to sync
> with
> > the network.
> >
> > Also, users of centralized wallet services like Coinbase would not have
> to
> > pay that fee; but users of native wallets like breadwallet would have n=
o
> > such option. This incentivizes users to use centralized wallets.
> >
> > So this is kind of imposing a worse user experience on users who want t=
o
> > use bitcoin the "right" way. That doesn't seem like a good thing to me =
:/
>
> SPV isn't the "right" way either ;)
>
=E2=80=8BHah, fair enough, there is no such thing as the "right" way to do
anything. But I still think punishing users who use SPV wallets is =E2=80=
=8Ba
less-than-ideal way to incentive people to run full nodes. Right now SPV is
the best way that exists for mobile phones to participate in the network in
a decentralized way. This proposal makes the user experience for mobile
wallets a little more confusing and annoying.
>
> If you're running a full node (the real "right way"), you should be able =
to
> earn more bitcoins than you pay out.
>
> Luke
>
--001a11c3844c3585cb05189a78f1
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"color:#336666"><br><=
/div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Mon, Jun =
15, 2015 at 8:41 PM, Luke Dashjr <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:lu=
ke@dashjr.org" target=3D"_blank">luke@dashjr.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><=
blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px=
#ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=3D"">On Tuesday, June 16, 2015 3:=
30:44 AM Kevin Greene wrote:<br>
> Would SPV wallets have to pay to connect to the network too? From the<=
br>
> user's perspective, it would be somewhat upsetting (and confusing)=
to see<br>
> your balance slowly draining every time you open your wallet app. It w=
ould<br>
> also tie up outputs every time you open up your wallet. You may go to =
pay<br>
> for something in a coffee shop, only to find that you can't spend =
your<br>
> bitcoin because the wallet had to create a transaction to pay to sync =
with<br>
> the network.<br>
><br>
> Also, users of centralized wallet services like Coinbase would not hav=
e to<br>
> pay that fee; but users of native wallets like breadwallet would have =
no<br>
> such option. This incentivizes users to use centralized wallets.<br>
><br>
> So this is kind of imposing a worse user experience on users who want =
to<br>
> use bitcoin the "right" way. That doesn't seem like a go=
od thing to me :/<br>
<br>
</span>SPV isn't the "right" way either ;)<br></blockquote><d=
iv><br></div><div><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"color:rgb(51,102,10=
2)">=E2=80=8BHah, fair enough, there is no such thing as the "right&qu=
ot; way to do anything. But I still think punishing users who use SPV walle=
ts is =E2=80=8Ba less-than-ideal way to incentive people to run full nodes.=
Right now SPV is the best way that exists for mobile phones to participate=
in the network in a decentralized way. This proposal makes the user experi=
ence for mobile wallets a little more confusing and annoying.</div></div><d=
iv>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex=
;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
If you're running a full node (the real "right way"), you sho=
uld be able to<br>
earn more bitcoins than you pay out.<br>
<span class=3D"HOEnZb"><font color=3D"#888888"><br>
Luke<br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div></div>
--001a11c3844c3585cb05189a78f1--
|
