Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.213.181 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.213.181; envelope-from=laanwj@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-ig0-f181.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <534592E2.7040800@gmail.com>
References: <CA+s+GJCn9U2kmyMH6w3o+m99NCfO0ws=SccvGBYJv07WVuF=eA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAADm4BCEFCiOpNzUThPPHUamP2256izU8pwD3nerLCxks0wENA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAS2fgTx40XSLhiygnJMrSbOC=iJ2YMVLNK7-AMt3ifvAHDZUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<E9BAD633-3B6A-4A2C-AA06-DB591973DF66@bitsofproof.com>
	<53456B99.9010207@monetize.io>
	<B2FEC170-7214-4E46-8830-153995870B62@bitsofproof.com>
	<00b77560-d7ed-4ed4-a4e5-eb1f00467a06@email.android.com>
	<0509477C-89F9-47C7-8820-29ACAD4A4A8E@bitsofproof.com>
	<CANEZrP2Q=TG+jejEVFFh5FhjzDDkySHNSTfwtKueLcHu=pB6Kw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+s+GJBRvDFgktTgW2sCvAVahrjxcGqfgHw0BVNPvwUupotVrg@mail.gmail.com>
	<534592E2.7040800@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2014 20:46:06 +0200
Message-ID: <CA+s+GJD5FpoP8M1GE3+Jhb0aQS+m+acWUnrx4iDB4bmcK9q-1g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com>
To: Justus Ranvier <justusranvier@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec51827b86dcb6104f6a083b8
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoind-in-background mode for SPV
	wallets
Precedence: list

--bcaec51827b86dcb6104f6a083b8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Justus Ranvier <justusranvier@gmail.com>wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 04/09/2014 06:19 PM, Wladimir wrote:
> > If no one wants to volunteer resources to support the network
> > anymore, we'll have failed.
>
> If the security of the network depends on a broken incentive model,
> then fix the design of the network so that economics works for you
> instead of against you.
>

My solution would be quick to implement and could help increase the number
of nodes in the short term. It will also smooth the way towards splitting
off the wallet from Bitcoin Core, by giving people a choice what wallet
they use with their full node.

That doesn't preclude looking for longer-term solutions that change the
incentive structure, but that is much more difficult and risky. I don't
believe it's a matter of 'fixing that instead' in a few hours, though I
nevertheless look forward to your pull request.

Wladimir

--bcaec51827b86dcb6104f6a083b8
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><br><div class=3D"gmail=
_quote">On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Justus Ranvier <span dir=3D"ltr">&l=
t;<a href=3D"mailto:justusranvier@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">justusranvie=
r@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----<br>
Hash: SHA1<br>
<div class=3D""><br>
On 04/09/2014 06:19 PM, Wladimir wrote:<br>
&gt; If no one wants to volunteer resources to support the network<br>
&gt; anymore, we&#39;ll have failed.<br>
<br>
</div>If the security of the network depends on a broken incentive model,<b=
r>
then fix the design of the network so that economics works for you<br>
instead of against you.<br></blockquote><div><br>My solution would be quick=
 to implement and could help increase the number of nodes in the short term=
. It will also smooth the way towards splitting off the wallet from Bitcoin=
 Core, by giving people a choice what wallet they use with their full node.=
<br>
</div><div><br></div><div>That doesn&#39;t preclude looking for longer-term=
 solutions that change the incentive structure, but that is much more diffi=
cult and risky. I don&#39;t believe it&#39;s a matter of &#39;fixing that i=
nstead&#39; in a few hours, though I nevertheless look forward to your pull=
 request.<br>
</div><div><br></div><div>Wladimir<br><br></div></div></div></div>

--bcaec51827b86dcb6104f6a083b8--