1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
|
Return-Path: <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8DCCE8E7
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 6 Aug 2015 23:32:13 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-io0-f174.google.com (mail-io0-f174.google.com
[209.85.223.174])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 057A3A6
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 6 Aug 2015 23:32:12 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by ioeg141 with SMTP id g141so96682028ioe.3
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 06 Aug 2015 16:32:12 -0700 (PDT)
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;
bh=2WfRUCi0sExvChW8dUSLXjlM09HpSV6DYcakotVZVgU=;
b=t+UIH0l31HHKeMpUqbdBJaD1odGXhRLxgqeHss4i842m0gtMfNUExVMAMte4lTKk1G
mgQ2RFx3Zvkaphxo1Nn4h6p/e1GAoEJrF+Rz5SyS/xEkQRUR5QguLP2qSH7dRStCmwIq
Rl5YO4bwIqwugB2CPfWPsgau7G0Hi/652hboYmZnhEVEvcNy5rJB/SbaoyVYiSnWoV2r
j88sSJIuCmIDRsngJlcx+y6o2I38ddkbiQRXFmuaBjSWUmOcLUf2bRDPRXfl73bc2kYK
HyzAkF8BXbZMJiwFsz3CBmAb7VGLBKDr5UanPcVx6fNYF4Moj0fFjmR+XJMxiPdgZIEg
FQXw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.9.137 with SMTP id 9mr5226995ioj.50.1438903932488; Thu,
06 Aug 2015 16:32:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.36.77.201 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Aug 2015 16:32:12 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAGLBAhf34uqzxprY37QnfhDpP4FddfRKGnTeHe+o5Zh-rguD-Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1c808715eac12f67cf9865dfd97c0a37@xbt.hk>
<CAGLBAhf34uqzxprY37QnfhDpP4FddfRKGnTeHe+o5Zh-rguD-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2015 01:32:12 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPg+sBhura_n92GErDeQVScJh6Y_J3t6KAED9mHYXjSbgMnGJw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
To: Dave Scotese <dscotese@litmocracy.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113f8f14c3119e051caced84
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,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] Wrapping up the block size debate with voting
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, 06 Aug 2015 23:32:13 -0000
--001a113f8f14c3119e051caced84
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 1:26 AM, Dave Scotese via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
"Miners can do this unilaterally" maybe, if they are a closed group, based
> on the 51% rule. But aren't they using full nodes for propagation? In this
> sense, anyone can vote by coding.
>
They don't need to use full nodes for propagation. Miners don't care when
other full nodes hear about their blocks, only whether they (eventually)
accept them.
And yes, full nodes can change what blocks they accept. That's called a
hard fork :)
--
Pieter
--001a113f8f14c3119e051caced84
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 1:26 AM, Dave Scotese via bitcoin-d=
ev <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundatio=
n.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>></spa=
n> wrote:<br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><br><blo=
ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #c=
cc solid;padding-left:1ex">"Miners can do this unilaterally" mayb=
e, if they are a closed group, based on the 51% rule. But aren't they u=
sing full nodes for propagation?=C2=A0 In this sense, anyone can vote by co=
ding.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>They don't need to use full n=
odes for propagation. Miners don't care when other full nodes hear abou=
t their blocks, only whether they (eventually) accept them.<br><br></div><d=
iv>And yes, full nodes can change what blocks they accept. That's calle=
d a hard fork :)<br><br>-- <br></div><div>Pieter<br>=C2=A0<br></div></div><=
br></div></div>
--001a113f8f14c3119e051caced84--
|
