Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <alex.mizrahi@gmail.com>) id 1XjDq7-00047q-Kq for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 20:58:03 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.212.174 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.174; envelope-from=alex.mizrahi@gmail.com; helo=mail-wi0-f174.google.com; Received: from mail-wi0-f174.google.com ([209.85.212.174]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1XjDq6-00042M-OB for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 20:58:03 +0000 Received: by mail-wi0-f174.google.com with SMTP id d1so13977wiv.1 for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 13:57:56 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.190.19 with SMTP id gm19mr7563209wjc.4.1414529876540; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 13:57:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.27.203.138 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 13:57:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgRjwg_XyvzHbMhmaiW85LmmsW3YiXHyhpKMHd2a03pH2Q@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAE28kUS-uDbd_Br3H5BxwRm1PZFpOwLhcyyZT9b1_VfRaBC9jw@mail.gmail.com> <CAJHLa0PeB-DMs2zo680FRvaejV-K97k2g0Ti9pPdaNeH+gYmog@mail.gmail.com> <CAE28kUSPb3ZC1nJyX7H__7cAgXvOvPbZ+Tub+htGd5+tujZndg@mail.gmail.com> <CAJHLa0M20QjBOwhOwJWJUcPBLzmaX1uuPy-6ytvJQWLZy68aeg@mail.gmail.com> <CAE28kUS7cr3i-pSew6Y+xvfLEY5D1mi4oHU-GXv+jEf-i_8sVQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABsx9T1RPkif1+DEsOLrFfr-sE=FCs_B5C5aZzKr6HZCHw15ag@mail.gmail.com> <CADfmNEk40DTHDB8if_y_2i_Omoszd_BgcSxf-oS+ZcQB0tZZhg@mail.gmail.com> <CAAS2fgSiz-XRVQ4V+KbrTUWG4=g=WGf8c-pF4b4fFnfyU9HOqQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAAS2fgRjwg_XyvzHbMhmaiW85LmmsW3YiXHyhpKMHd2a03pH2Q@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 22:57:56 +0200 Message-ID: <CAE28kUSqqcsMJArK29nG+UCiTX9buiJbQoMb30-oH-G=eFxrnQ@mail.gmail.com> From: Alex Mizrahi <alex.mizrahi@gmail.com> To: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bea3792d0c367050681e64c X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) 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 (alex.mizrahi[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 X-Headers-End: 1XjDq6-00042M-OB Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Fwd: death by halving 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, 28 Oct 2014 20:58:03 -0000 --047d7bea3792d0c367050681e64c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > This thread is, in my opinion, a waste of time. It's yet again > another perennial bikeshedding proposal brought up many times since at > least 2011, suggesting random changes for > non-existing(/not-yet-existing) issues. > > There is a lot more complexity to the system than the subsidy schedule. > Well, the main question is what makes Bitcoin secure. It is secured by proofs of work which are produced by miners. Miners have economic incentives to play by the rules; in simple terms, that is more profitable than performing attacks. So the question is, why and when it works? It would be nice to know the boundaries, no? --047d7bea3792d0c367050681e64c 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"><div= >=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;b= order-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> This thread is, in my opinion, a waste of time.=C2=A0 It's yet again<br= > another perennial bikeshedding proposal brought up many times since at<br> least 2011, suggesting random changes for<br> non-existing(/not-yet-existing) issues.<br> <br> There is a lot more complexity to the system than the subsidy schedule.<br>= </blockquote><div><br></div><div>Well, the main question is what makes Bitc= oin secure.</div><div>It is secured by proofs of work which are produced by= miners.=C2=A0</div><div>Miners have economic incentives to play by the rul= es; in simple terms, that is more profitable than performing attacks.</div>= <div><br></div><div>So the question is, why and when it works? It would be = nice to know the boundaries, no?</div><div><br></div></div></div></div> --047d7bea3792d0c367050681e64c--