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
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <tomh@thinlink.com>) id 1Yq9Fn-00006k-Op
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 07 May 2015 00:01:27 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from mail-pd0-f175.google.com ([209.85.192.175])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Yq9Fm-0007BW-IB
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 07 May 2015 00:01:27 +0000
Received: by pdea3 with SMTP id a3so24059454pde.3
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Wed, 06 May 2015 17:01:20 -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;
bh=V7P+Kh6gQSZ/kpolt4Kdzb+2Qpb4+kX1zzqcGJkQwwU=;
b=HFlnWXjHtRTSxf9f3hRKrqLDDzTbW27rrhw/mD1O66YNyRMbZDarSIKmlrt+EV/4hf
QipG/SD8fQb6A52xrTEeNOB1IP+gRM2oB5ikFOvUY2QUbCemMnyI7sgKTEo08+OW3pLW
UXjsovnEg2/S/pqHmHG+AS1z8azurPGcXGsqro8dPfUvsHg+0PhyseVHTL8TeKftFcmI
NXbW103U9NbUqnU7LXJx+0y7lRUFTuZIc443k7zuR6Qg0WM4/h7NLRlSVwzcHZPdTpFi
5GufldjhKdWmmdLfNbb/+tCYojBW0mJWecsgMTEpfbRW4r2pMM7gvk7Q31m6Ihmr/Mx/
3dqg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnfW7EqQielsUifl3bm16YbE8Q5CM0AWQGtRLlVpF9cLFH3p1P2apwwdTZmVrjziybntCvL
X-Received: by 10.66.235.200 with SMTP id uo8mr2150545pac.18.1430956880747;
Wed, 06 May 2015 17:01:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.100.1.239] ([204.58.254.99])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id x2sm177814pdm.40.2015.05.06.17.01.19
(version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Wed, 06 May 2015 17:01:19 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <554AAB2E.6000006@thinlink.com>
Date: Wed, 06 May 2015 17:00:46 -0700
From: Tom Harding <tomh@thinlink.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Matt Corrallo <bitcoin-list@bluematt.me>
References: <554A91BE.6060105@bluematt.me>
In-Reply-To: <554A91BE.6060105@bluematt.me>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------------090709040804040302090708"
X-Spam-Score: 1.6 (+)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
0.6 RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB RBL: SORBS: sender is an abusable web server
[204.58.254.99 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net]
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
X-Headers-End: 1Yq9Fm-0007BW-IB
Cc: Bitcoin Development <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 00:01:27 -0000
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------090709040804040302090708
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
On 5/6/2015 3:12 PM, Matt Corallo wrote:
> Long-term incentive compatibility requires
> that there be some fee pressure, and that blocks be relatively
> consistently full or very nearly full.
I think it's way too early to even consider a future era when the fiat
value of the block reward is no longer the biggest-by-far mining incentive.
Creating fee pressure means driving some people to choose something
else, not bitcoin. "Too many people using bitcoin" is nowhere on the
list of problems today. It's reckless to tinker with adoption in hopes
of spurring innovation on speculation, while a "can kick" is available.
Adoption is currently at miniscule, test-flight, relatively
insignificant levels when compared to global commerce. As Gavin
discussed in the article, under "Block size and miner fees… again," the
best way to maximize miner incentives is to focus on doing things that
are likely to increase adoption, which, in our fiat-dominated world,
lead to a justifiably increased exchange rate.
Any innovation attractive enough to relieve the block size pressure will
do so just as well without artificial stimulus.
Thanks for kicking off the discussion.
--------------090709040804040302090708
Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On 5/6/2015 3:12 PM, Matt Corallo wrote:<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:554A91BE.6060105@bluematt.me" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Long-term incentive compatibility requires
that there be some fee pressure, and that blocks be relatively
consistently full or very nearly full.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
I think it's way too early to even consider a future era when the
fiat value of the block reward is no longer the biggest-by-far
mining incentive.<br>
<br>
Creating fee pressure means driving some people to choose something
else, not bitcoin. "Too many people using bitcoin" is nowhere on the
list of problems today. It's reckless to tinker with adoption in
hopes of spurring innovation on speculation, while a "can kick" is
available.<br>
<br>
Adoption is currently at miniscule, test-flight, relatively
insignificant levels when compared to global commerce. As Gavin
discussed in the article, under "Block size and miner fees… again,"
the best way to maximize miner incentives is to focus on doing
things that are likely to increase adoption, which, in our
fiat-dominated world, lead to a justifiably increased exchange rate.<br>
<br>
Any innovation attractive enough to relieve the block size pressure
will do so just as well without artificial stimulus.<br>
<br>
Thanks for kicking off the discussion.<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>
--------------090709040804040302090708--
|
