diff options
| author | Bryan Bishop <kanzure@gmail.com> | 2015-12-09 22:31:42 -0600 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2015-12-10 04:31:43 +0000 |
| commit | 8690d353c573d2f9338c7ec365dcf7b1cfbc75ce (patch) | |
| tree | acfd7e3b464f7e5ff3b6a95e5b274b1e34bd4d89 /4d | |
| parent | bbd09cb54e91d81de919b4ed781d1549545b8f9f (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-8690d353c573d2f9338c7ec365dcf7b1cfbc75ce.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-8690d353c573d2f9338c7ec365dcf7b1cfbc75ce.zip | |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Scaling by Partitioning
Diffstat (limited to '4d')
| -rw-r--r-- | 4d/13f6b2b6f153738cdf63e2a12d67b2247027d2 | 138 |
1 files changed, 138 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/4d/13f6b2b6f153738cdf63e2a12d67b2247027d2 b/4d/13f6b2b6f153738cdf63e2a12d67b2247027d2 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..e86b2d7df --- /dev/null +++ b/4d/13f6b2b6f153738cdf63e2a12d67b2247027d2 @@ -0,0 +1,138 @@ +Return-Path: <kanzure@gmail.com> +Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org + [172.17.192.35]) + by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 589F2E48 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Thu, 10 Dec 2015 04:31:43 +0000 (UTC) +X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 +Received: from mail-ig0-f176.google.com (mail-ig0-f176.google.com + [209.85.213.176]) + by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A608E11D + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Thu, 10 Dec 2015 04:31:42 +0000 (UTC) +Received: by mail-ig0-f176.google.com with SMTP id ph11so5391582igc.1 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Wed, 09 Dec 2015 20:31:42 -0800 (PST) +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:content-transfer-encoding; + bh=6DykIBb2SgP21M4z83czqucDq3O+NYWwn6pqNhkRGZA=; + b=P4PnH4lZy8EZgE7tlmhnOyupD7FHD7LCsEJHIUUPa1Er0cl6n0rUyXhVUA+IGuCpRo + N8AIt1rVI4ORFlQrfLjs92fpA4sSe4tXNa1n12R7eFKo3gtq/8QXSk6Bgf/y/6Gi5XrD + JJBqM1h2148uJpf6Hp8Fxxv0Gk/JseJM+90k46oGN1I02AD5jL26Toa8uk9OotUVke6i + HVxezsXWXLbKleqrK5T0HkPiL/d9M7c7+uf5DSl7muX69uxz6zGL2e1ijciQd+430ldH + 6hPc/smqKs/G5KodAs4DPbHw1RWEqnHURaFkWUNF66DLdxulKjDFqKZtXWgQSQo1Q9Rs + JG7g== +MIME-Version: 1.0 +X-Received: by 10.50.155.106 with SMTP id vv10mr13051523igb.36.1449721902159; + Wed, 09 Dec 2015 20:31:42 -0800 (PST) +Received: by 10.36.66.132 with HTTP; Wed, 9 Dec 2015 20:31:42 -0800 (PST) +In-Reply-To: <CABCnA7W25KoHuSuB3Az250_PiRcFd5MjjKJfrm_qv4oaYUT5mg@mail.gmail.com> +References: <CABCnA7Wqz76m8qo5BYT41Z=hBH+fUfOc4xsFAGg=Niv7Jgkqsg@mail.gmail.com> + <CAJmQggC1X5Lgt4xGoMtBZ_v3hC2GXcYaj2FngV2_7A=TDfSuEg@mail.gmail.com> + <CAL8tG=mxYE97iMO05mPq4_f8VcmFBYqAmyPqTs439bPRGhaVqA@mail.gmail.com> + <CABCnA7W25KoHuSuB3Az250_PiRcFd5MjjKJfrm_qv4oaYUT5mg@mail.gmail.com> +Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 22:31:42 -0600 +Message-ID: <CABaSBay9G3NQHn0HUkKfenr+e4be6arSBvy6vD=1+M3eSZJHtw@mail.gmail.com> +From: Bryan Bishop <kanzure@gmail.com> +To: Akiva Lichtner <akiva.lichtner@gmail.com>, Bryan Bishop <kanzure@gmail.com> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, + DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, + 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] Scaling by Partitioning +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, 10 Dec 2015 04:31:43 -0000 + +On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 9:58 PM, Akiva Lichtner wrote: +> Correct me if I am wrong, but the dream of a virtual currency where +> everybody is equal and runs the client on their mobile device went out th= +e +> window long ago. I think that went out with the special mining hardware. = +If + +Mining equipment isn't for transaction verification. The mining +equipment is used to work on Proof-of-Work. Thanks. + +> my organization had to accept bitcoin payments I would assume that we'll +> need a small server farm for transaction verification, and that we would = +see + +Unfortunately Bitcoin does not work like those centralized systems; it +should not be surprising that a system focused so much on +decentralized and independent verification would have developers +working on so many non-bandwidth scaling solutions. These other +proposals seek to preserve existing properties of Bitcoin (such as +cheap verification, low-bandwidth) while also increasing the amount of +activity that can enjoy the decentralized fruits of Proof-of-Work +labor. But not helpful to assume this can only look like Visa or any +database on a cluster etc... + +> would be entirely okay for a guy on a smartphone to delegate verification= + to +> a trusted party, as long as the trust chain stops there and there is plen= +ty +> of choice. + +I don't suppose I could tempt you with probabilistically checkable +proofs, could I? These verify in milliseconds, grow sublinear in size +of the total data, but have no near-term proposal available yet. + +> I am guessing the trustless virtual currency police would get pretty upse= +t +> about such a pragmatic approach, but it's not really a choice, the failur= +e +> to scale has already occurred. All things considered I think that Bitcoin + +Perhaps instead of failure-to-scale you mean "failure to apply +traditional scaling has already failed", which shouldn't be so +surprising given the different security model that Bitcoin operates +on. + +> most people trust at least one other person, so it's not that weird. + +see the following recent text, +""" +Bitcoin is P2P electronic cash that is valuable over legacy systems +because of the monetary autonomy it brings to its users through +decentralization. Bitcoin seeks to address the root problem with +conventional currency: all the trust that's required to make it work-- + +-- Not that justified trust is a bad thing, but trust makes systems +brittle, opaque, and costly to operate. Trust failures result in systemic +collapses, trust curation creates inequality and monopoly lock-in, and +naturally arising trust choke-points can be abused to deny access to +due process. Through the use of cryptographic proof and decentralized +networks Bitcoin minimizes and replaces these trust costs. + +With the available technology, there are fundamental trade-offs between +scale and decentralization. If the system is too costly people will be +forced to trust third parties rather than independently enforcing the +system's rules. If the Bitcoin blockchain=E2=80=99s resource usage, relativ= +e +to the available technology, is too great, Bitcoin loses its competitive +advantages compared to legacy systems because validation will be too +costly (pricing out many users), forcing trust back into the system. +If capacity is too low and our methods of transacting too inefficient, +access to the chain for dispute resolution will be too costly, again +pushing trust back into the system. +""" + +- Bryan +http://heybryan.org/ +1 512 203 0507 + |