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
|
Return-Path: <tomh@thinlink.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90C26BC2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 30 Jun 2015 00:42:34 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pa0-f54.google.com (mail-pa0-f54.google.com
[209.85.220.54])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C8A732
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 30 Jun 2015 00:42:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by paceq1 with SMTP id eq1so112580939pac.3
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 29 Jun 2015 17:42:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to
:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=M0Ri4yOsq5Y/zRwKbbSnKKYVFqGnrAbFVYrPzx5FhiA=;
b=bCehj3XiZrR07gx1PqGx4UNJiYNgKIkISpbA0VXJ9lsXp7K/DL0wE+WpYuti56h1lf
nNvH7VnFfbPYvpua7SWfu9OOhZMIEUSjcc4Nt5DbwtCWBjHui89LNhW1AIu4fDwXwq3b
Vt+a3mKd8Fm/esKAlluWPIvbSSzkWAEgsHGWK4jrDTPWlyn8Fz0goFGunDOLPCmo3heY
cw2qMZPULcYRxjgfmYA65J1CJQx1yqnF9kDhy3cEvPEkw7bTc14rKF6tV0O95OxiH+yE
y5z9ZGzJJ9EitLooWAiY5QvDYxbaOB3sX+/viD2ooP/W6j2V3Z/g3lUh7JpXkllKqB+1
ZuOg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk08jsUiqDOhYWrNu3cyugDziT9VjOB8c9OzEjsErpAdITT3NWMa4Qy6pmyXclSxMRAq5L0
X-Received: by 10.66.231.42 with SMTP id td10mr37033899pac.98.1435624953999;
Mon, 29 Jun 2015 17:42:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.89] (99-8-65-117.lightspeed.davlca.sbcglobal.net.
[99.8.65.117]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id
jd4sm43429204pbd.46.2015.06.29.17.42.32
(version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Mon, 29 Jun 2015 17:42:32 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <5591E5FC.4040003@thinlink.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2015 17:42:36 -0700
From: Tom Harding <tomh@thinlink.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64;
rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Adam Back <adam@cypherspace.org>
References: <COL402-EAS1148599DFFBB257C33F293ACDAB0@phx.gbl> <CALqxMTHbeyyVAO9qXO4wrQo3sCh89gwMRS9BjiN+4iMs-bt5ow@mail.gmail.com> <CAOoPuRarNoPwLxVqjJ_g4b6HsWJecB-oCdfEjaknKbUnKdnmEg@mail.gmail.com> <CALqxMTGXcbES5Pwz3cWO+PQK5kmf3rZ_i00=b=PBnO678XuF0A@mail.gmail.com> <COL131-DS8E3DCDBD1A0F359206781CDAB0@phx.gbl> <CAOG=w-swydsyzHx7kWKCCWnrDT0kG=c+FTDmwFD3sjbA0i4TpA@mail.gmail.com> <CABsx9T3PaBcYkXWyn=TmCROn61CGkEYD9qxob6hKGdD3sy-SyQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALqxMTFv+nLo3phA2HS26F=r5+yGCOh=z8+Kub7GuC_bGVOfXg@mail.gmail.com> <CALqxMTG7+MMN50VH9-Y++B1_DeBXTBKpkeA5dYT1EbVGZ1aYag@mail.gmail.com> <CABsx9T3Xhu4n3LzjEjanbAnUr5UeG0DzY7HXchfOvEa+BNqakw@mail.gmail.com>
<CALqxMTGd1mB4Sra=ORV=d0y1v8KzUQnK8=MX2_MFP1NuMnPm+Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALqxMTGd1mB4Sra=ORV=d0y1v8KzUQnK8=MX2_MFP1NuMnPm+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,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] A Proposed Compromise to the Block Size Limit
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: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 00:42:34 -0000
On 6/28/2015 3:07 PM, Adam Back wrote:
> We dont know what that limit is but people have been imagining 1,000
> or 10,000 transactions per anchor transaction. Basically users would
> park Bitcoins a on a hub channel instead of the blockchain.
This re-introduces a solved problem (solved by bitcoin better than
anything else) - worrying whether your "payment hub" actually connects
to whom you wish to pay.
There will be enormous network effects and centralization pressure in
the payment-hub space. A few entities, maybe single entity, should be
expected to quickly corner the market and own the whole thing.
This concept is far too untested to justify amateur economic meddling in
the bitcoin fee market by setting a restrictive hard cap below technical
feasibility.
I can guess exactly who would want to keep bitcoin from improving:=20
*those who hope to be the future payment hub oligarchs*.
|
