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
|
Return-Path: <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF7A6895
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 6 Aug 2015 13:40:42 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-la0-f51.google.com (mail-la0-f51.google.com
[209.85.215.51])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68B531D7
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 6 Aug 2015 13:40:41 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by labow3 with SMTP id ow3so49364483lab.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 06 Aug 2015 06:40:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:cc:content-type;
bh=yXabax6qVi6dpfxMHKQajaWX2hBHwDQUDDJRD5ZvAuA=;
b=YGZh3d5zzba8G+hFZHFr25ES2xBSlYn+viyZYaZdQdP4m2/rhAiuBL5u+I/CERMy+G
Z5xZHGUEIQEBPG4MRU/5e8LXfJnyT+ZYzyCJI5evtb1nMT/9jF8n5MDaXRrnWHecMv+e
Juwqd6T7bZ1/qnLn2PAE+X0iwryuY3NiqB+jEjngaS2k406/4g11H1UrbVaY7+KUJj8w
1GCykaSx+Bs0u2se5Zsj13RQ5+t0+uTrKqAmNAEMbSHnwcL9vU4ObsFZ5Ub63H+VBeJX
kdmnn3cwKD3FIOvLQrG8ooGDDoqw4Zg2oEx5lm/8c44YvWdeVF4VH3iLTCUZaIhYEtMo
okfg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.2.41 with SMTP id 9mr1670733lar.65.1438868439642; Thu,
06 Aug 2015 06:40:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.25.143.195 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Aug 2015 06:40:39 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABm2gDoNbhc1=kgc0F+wSm33hTmRmmptk-XcaZxsm=6iJkWu=w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPg+sBj-wA1DMrwkQRWnzQoB5NR-q=2-5=WDAAUYfSpXRZSTqw@mail.gmail.com>
<CABsx9T1NqBX9Tr8vRCtCeri76e0wrtkvRhEPyG9Advv_3Uqxng@mail.gmail.com>
<CAPg+sBjwVxYTOn3+bwahHGSGpBh5BCh5b4OOFkw_2x97YZSFPQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+w+GKS_wDDgf=HjPgD5QZ_wdTRg7i_oYUgBRmh9HpufETAP=w@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDqvpWdHdjo1OBzbw-6ivu5DEGcfvK8duc3-KAjsSeWapA@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+w+GKRPPcgCO0pBP2PjKGU49tWuBoF1vRJzY+4fWn71HOVDPw@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDqV1NdHJZBmUWX3AxVYy6ErU7AB-wsWgGzbiTL1twdq6g@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+w+GKTLBWj6b4ppwrmnXb_gybYFcrX7haLBSdCnMaijy2An4w@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDpWPhYNh=g-ZXCsfe-aPq=N6NKSWKP9kr-KtPVrWAxB7Q@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAO2FKHsczkwwqO87cJFtxBp9JE=vf=GcxLx37GpRUkPq8VGHQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDpp5+hkHmd6op6PPW658siKoEMRDfTWiEHHM7vJSLDhyA@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+BnGuFNOjzLaiPPnUSi-rkU94UMgmP30Si8N3oBSYG0q8j-_w@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDoNbhc1=kgc0F+wSm33hTmRmmptk-XcaZxsm=6iJkWu=w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2015 09:40:39 -0400
Message-ID: <CABsx9T22KUcbRb4ZfRDikbxK05pqWY1=uvYo10toWA-JwGa-PQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013c6258393844051ca4aac3
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,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 <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Block size following technological growth
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: Thu, 06 Aug 2015 13:40:42 -0000
--089e013c6258393844051ca4aac3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 9:26 PM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> This is a much more reasonable position. I wish this had been starting
> point of this discussion instead of "the block size limit must be
> increased as soon as possible or bitcoin will fail".
>
It REALLY doesn't help the debate when you say patently false statements
like that.
My first blog post on this issue is here:
http://gavinandresen.ninja/why-increasing-the-max-block-size-is-urgent
... and I NEVER say "Bitcoin will fail". I say:
"If the number of transactions waiting gets large enough, the end result
will be an over-saturated network, busy doing nothing productive. I don=E2=
=80=99t
think that is likely=E2=80=93 it is more likely people just stop using Bitc=
oin
because transaction confirmation becomes increasingly unreliable."
Mike sketched out the worst-case here:
https://medium.com/@octskyward/crash-landing-f5cc19908e32
... and concludes:
"I believe there are no situations in which Bitcoin can enter an overload
situation and come out with its reputation and user base intact. Both would
suffer heavily and as Bitcoin is the founder of the cryptocurrency concept,
the idea itself would inevitably suffer some kind of negative
repercussions."
------------
So please stop with the over-the-top claims about what "the other side"
believe, there are enough of those (on both sides of the debate) on reddit.
I'd really like to focus on how to move forward, and how best to resolve
difficult questions like this in the future.
--=20
--
Gavin Andresen
--089e013c6258393844051ca4aac3
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">On W=
ed, Aug 5, 2015 at 9:26 PM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=
=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin=
-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=
=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padd=
ing-left:1ex"><div id=3D":3dk" class=3D"a3s" style=3D"overflow:hidden">This=
is a much more reasonable position. I wish this had been starting<br>
point of this discussion instead of "the block size limit must be<br>
increased as soon as possible or bitcoin will fail".</div></blockquote=
></div><br>It REALLY doesn't help the debate when you say patently fals=
e statements like that.</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div clas=
s=3D"gmail_extra">My first blog post on this issue is here:</div><div class=
=3D"gmail_extra">=C2=A0=C2=A0<a href=3D"http://gavinandresen.ninja/why-incr=
easing-the-max-block-size-is-urgent">http://gavinandresen.ninja/why-increas=
ing-the-max-block-size-is-urgent</a></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></=
div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">... and I NEVER say "Bitcoin will fail&=
quot;.=C2=A0 I say:</div><br>"If the number of transactions waiting ge=
ts large enough, the end result will be an over-saturated network, busy doi=
ng nothing productive. I don=E2=80=99t think that is likely=E2=80=93 it is =
more likely people just stop using Bitcoin because transaction confirmation=
becomes increasingly unreliable."<br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><=
/div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">Mike sketched out the worst-case here:</div=
><div class=3D"gmail_extra">=C2=A0=C2=A0<a href=3D"https://medium.com/@octs=
kyward/crash-landing-f5cc19908e32">https://medium.com/@octskyward/crash-lan=
ding-f5cc19908e32</a><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div cl=
ass=3D"gmail_extra">... and concludes:</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br>=
</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">"I believe there are no situations in=
which Bitcoin can enter an overload situation and come out with its reputa=
tion and user base intact. Both would suffer heavily and as Bitcoin is the =
founder of the cryptocurrency concept, the idea itself would inevitably suf=
fer some kind of negative repercussions."<br clear=3D"all"><div><br></=
div><div><br></div><div>------------</div><div><br></div><div>So please sto=
p with the over-the-top claims about what "the other side" believ=
e, there are enough of those (on both sides of the debate) on reddit. I'=
;d really like to focus on how to move forward, and how best to resolve dif=
ficult questions like this in the future.</div><div><br></div>-- <br><div c=
lass=3D"gmail_signature">--<br>Gavin Andresen<br></div>
</div></div>
--089e013c6258393844051ca4aac3--
|
