MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CABr1YTfiCx6igG9s6NbdD7pWLuoYSJ1QFcX_RnhbdtX5r=Z5Xg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABr1YTf72fdQmTDEHAWVKqvTCLSpJZyiiw4g3ifrY8x5RZ=shQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABr1YTfwcOQuNyqO57=jdghTnqt56u6pBvK6+dWbED-4OMh+Ug@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABr1YTfEEXoQJ4SUtrUki9_WetWbGV7TEB+3usJGQqu-P55kSA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABr1YTfiCx6igG9s6NbdD7pWLuoYSJ1QFcX_RnhbdtX5r=Z5Xg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2015 12:55:47 -0700
Message-ID: <CABr1YTdBEUCT2AONBMD-aEh=Opu80H4U0H-4ZFFMg6+jECpCPw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0160b420dee7a1051a262cc0
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Thoughts on Forks, Scalability,
	and other Bitcoin inconveniences.
Precedence: list

--089e0160b420dee7a1051a262cc0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

I should clarify that by "most use cases" I'm not envisioning a bunch of
cryptogeeks [us, or at least myself and a few of us] happily buying up hard
disks, waiting hours, days, weeks to spawn up new full nodes. I'm
envisioning a world where every person has access to this technology and
finds it practical, convenient, and safe ti use.

- Eric Lombrozo
On Jul 5, 2015 11:50 AM, "Eric Lombrozo" <elombrozo@gmail.com> wrote:

> Blockchain validation has become too expensive to properly secure the
> network as per our original security model. The level of validation
> required to comply with our security model has become completely
> impractical for most use cases. Block space is still cheap only because of
> block reward subsidy (which decreases exponentially with time). The
> economics are already completely jacked - larger blocks will only worsen
> this disparity.
>
> The only practical way for the network to function at present (and what
> has essentially ended up happening, if often tacitly) is by introducing
> trust, in validators, miners, relayers, explorer websites, online wallets,
> etc...which in and of itself wouldn't be the end of the world were it not
> for the fact that the raison d'etre of bitcoin is trustlessness - and the
> security model is very much based on this idea. Because of this, there's
> been a tendency to deny that bitcoin cannot presently scale without trust.
> This is horrible because our entire security model has gone out the
> window...and has been replaced with something that isn't specified at all!
>
> We don't really know the boundaries of our model, as the fork a couple of
> days ago demonstrated. Right now we're basically trusting a few devs and
> some mining pool operators that until now have been willing to cooperate
> for the benefit of the network. It is dangerous to assume this will
> continue perpetually. Even assuming the best intentions, an incident might
> occur that this cooperation cannot easily repair.
>
> We need to either solve the validation cost/bottleneck issue...or we need
> to construct a new security model that takes these trust assumptions into
> account.
>
> - Eric Lombrozo
>

--089e0160b420dee7a1051a262cc0
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p dir=3D"ltr">I should clarify that by &quot;most use cases&quot; I&#39;m =
not envisioning a bunch of cryptogeeks [us, or at least myself and a few of=
 us] happily buying up hard disks, waiting hours, days, weeks to spawn up n=
ew full nodes. I&#39;m envisioning a world where every person has access to=
 this technology and finds it practical, convenient, and safe ti use.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">- Eric Lombrozo</p>
<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Jul 5, 2015 11:50 AM, &quot;Eric Lombrozo&quo=
t; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:elombrozo@gmail.com">elombrozo@gmail.com</a>&gt; w=
rote:<br type=3D"attribution"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"ma=
rgin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><p dir=3D"ltr"=
>Blockchain validation has become too expensive to properly secure the netw=
ork as per our original security model. The level of validation required to=
 comply with our security model has become completely impractical for most =
use cases. Block space is still cheap only because of block reward subsidy =
(which decreases exponentially with time). The economics are already comple=
tely jacked - larger blocks will only worsen this disparity.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">The only practical way for the network to function at presen=
t (and what has essentially ended up happening, if often tacitly) is by int=
roducing trust, in validators, miners, relayers, explorer websites, online =
wallets, etc...which in and of itself wouldn&#39;t be the end of the world =
were it not for the fact that the raison d&#39;etre of bitcoin is trustless=
ness - and the security model is very much based on this idea. Because of t=
his, there&#39;s been a tendency to deny that bitcoin cannot presently scal=
e without trust. This is horrible because our entire security model has gon=
e out the window...and has been replaced with something that isn&#39;t spec=
ified at all!</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">We don&#39;t really know the boundaries of our model, as the=
 fork a couple of days ago demonstrated. Right now we&#39;re basically trus=
ting a few devs and some mining pool operators that until now have been wil=
ling to cooperate for the benefit of the network. It is dangerous to assume=
 this will continue perpetually. Even assuming the best intentions, an inci=
dent might occur that this cooperation cannot easily repair.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">We need to either solve the validation cost/bottleneck issue=
...or we need to construct a new security model that takes these trust assu=
mptions into account.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">- Eric Lombrozo</p>
</blockquote></div>

--089e0160b420dee7a1051a262cc0--