From: Thomas Zander <thomas@thomaszander.se>
To: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 18:24:24 +0200
Message-ID: <4999292.m94ooXBn8O@pluto>
User-Agent: KMail/4.14.1 (Linux/3.16.0-4-amd64; KDE/4.14.2; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <CABm2gDqhoDrQAVAE4oedHEK2s_iYwPAADVZVj2zb940eG2hGBQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABsx9T16fH+56isq95m4+QWsKwP==tf75ep8ghnEcBoV4OtZJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1963286.x5NhlJ5RfS@pluto>
	<CABm2gDqhoDrQAVAE4oedHEK2s_iYwPAADVZVj2zb940eG2hGBQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fees and the block-finding process
Precedence: list

On Wednesday 12. August 2015 11.45.53 Jorge Tim=F3n wrote:
> This question had been dodged repeatedly (one more time in this last
> response).=20

This "last response" had a very direct answer to your question, why do =
you=20
think it was dodged?
I wrote; "To buy more time, get bigger blocks now." (quoted from parent=
-of-
parent)
But also said here;
http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/0101=
29.html
and here;
http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/0101=
86.html


> Then we could go one by one and classify them as:
>=20
> 1) Potential indirect consequence of rising fees.

I have not made any arguments that fall within this section.

> 2) Software problem independent of a concrete block size that needs t=
o
> be solved anyway

I'd like to suggest that number two is not described narrowly enough. T=
his=20
includes everything that we need, ever will need and want in the future=
...

2) Testing and architectural improvements related to nodes that get mor=
e=20
transactions than can be handled for a considerable time.

This includes problems we don't know of yet, since we haven't run under=
=20
these conditions before.

> If you think there's more "problem groups", please let me know.
> Otherwise I don't see the point in repeating the question. I have not=

> received a straight answer but you think you've given it.

I quoted one such answer above, would be interested in knowing how you=20=

missed it.
Here is another one from 2 hours before that email;
 "All the banks, nasdaq, countries, businesses etc etc
 "now contemplating using Bitcoin itself will see this as a risk too bi=
g to
 "ignore and the 1Mb Bitcoin will loose 99% of its perceived value."

source; http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-Aug=
ust/010180.html


> Seems like a dead end.

After repeating some answers you said were missing, it would be nice to=
=20
know where the connection drops.

Maybe you don't understand what people answer, if so, please ask to exp=
lain=20
instead of saying people are dodging the question.  ;)
--=20
Thomas Zander