path: root/40/cebf6f1f0c71c35b48c5acac9bdf8f722effb9

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 <thyshizzle@outlook.com>) id 1YzXKh-00036y-W6
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Mon, 01 Jun 2015 21:33:20 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of outlook.com
	designates 65.54.190.211 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=65.54.190.211; envelope-from=thyshizzle@outlook.com;
	helo=BAY004-OMC4S9.hotmail.com; 
Received: from bay004-omc4s9.hotmail.com ([65.54.190.211])
	by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1YzXKg-0007I2-Gi
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Mon, 01 Jun 2015 21:33:19 +0000
Received: from BAY403-EAS416 ([65.54.190.199]) by BAY004-OMC4S9.hotmail.com
	over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(7.5.7601.22751);
	Mon, 1 Jun 2015 14:33:12 -0700
X-TMN: [Bc+M449l5MW82YD54irH7I0XZG5vP45x]
X-Originating-Email: [thyshizzle@outlook.com]
Message-ID: <BAY403-EAS416EB557ABDDCA6FE2FCC7FC2B60@phx.gbl>
Content-Type: multipart/related;
	boundary="_60d7cc6e-02cd-4743-b043-57ebd3b08e94_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Warren Togami Jr. <wtogami@gmail.com>
From: Thy Shizzle <thyshizzle@outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2015 07:32:47 +1000
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Jun 2015 21:33:12.0917 (UTC)
	FILETIME=[90154850:01D09CB2]
X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/)
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
	(thyshizzle[at]outlook.com)
	-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
	no trust [65.54.190.211 listed in list.dnswl.org]
	-0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
	1.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	1.0 FREEMAIL_REPLY         From and body contain different freemails
X-Headers-End: 1YzXKg-0007I2-Gi
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Fwd: Block Size Increase Requirements
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: Mon, 01 Jun 2015 21:33:20 -0000

--_60d7cc6e-02cd-4743-b043-57ebd3b08e94_
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="_9f28659d-6362-4430-9600-4edbf1913243_"

--_9f28659d-6362-4430-9600-4edbf1913243_
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Ah sorry=2C I just thought you were saying doesn't matter which side let 'e=
m burn.

If I were the Chinese and people moved to 20mb MAX size blocks and said stu=
ff you=2C I'd just start firing out small coinbase only blocks now=2C if th=
ey truly have >50% hashing power and they collaborate chances are they can =
build a longer chain of just coinbase for themselves then the rest of the n=
etwork doing big blocks. They don't even have to propagate this chain to yo=
u in a hurry right? And then they never have to receive a 20mb block from y=
ou because they have a longer chain without 20mb blocks and always ahead of=
 your big blocks. As long as it is the longest chain it is Authority so let=
 you guys transact your coinbase from the blocks you create etc. then whamo=
 along come the chinese and supply a longer chain of just coinbase only blo=
cks which invalidates all your previous transactions and gives them all the=
 coinbase they stamped=2C while invalidating yours.

But who cares about them right :p
________________________________
From: Warren Togami Jr.<mailto:wtogami@gmail.com>
Sent: =E2=80=8E2/=E2=80=8E06/=E2=80=8E2015 4:19 AM
Cc: Bitcoin Dev<mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Fwd: Block Size Increase Requirements

By reversing Mike's language to the reality of the situation I had hoped
people would realize how abjectly ignorant and insensitive his statement
was.  I am sorry to those in the community if they misunderstood my post. I
thought it was obvious that it was sarcasm where I do not seriously believe
particular participants should be excluded.

On Mon=2C Jun 1=2C 2015 at 3:06 AM=2C Thy Shizzle <thyshizzle@outlook.com> =
wrote:

>  Doesn't mean you should build something that says "fuck you" to the
> companies that have invested in farms of ASICS. To say "Oh yea if they
> can't mine it how we want stuff 'em" is naive. I get decentralisation=2C =
but
> don't dis incentivise mining. If miners are telling you that you're going
> to hurt them=2C esp. Miners that combined hold > 50% hashing power=2C why=
 would
> you say too bad so sad? Why not just start stripping bitcoin out of
> adopters wallets? Same thing.
>  ------------------------------
> From: Warren Togami Jr. <wtogami@gmail.com>
> Sent: =E2=80=8E1/=E2=80=8E06/=E2=80=8E2015 10:30 PM
> Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Fwd: Block Size Increase Requirements
>
>   Whilst it would be nice if miners in *outside* China can carry on
> forever regardless of their internet situation=2C nobody has any inherent
> "right" to mine if they can't do the job - if miners in *outside* China
> can't get the trivial amounts of bandwidth required through their firewal=
l *TO
> THE MAJORITY OF THE HASHRATE* and end up being outcompeted then OK=2C too
> bad=2C we'll have to carry on without them.
>
>
> On Mon=2C Jun 1=2C 2015 at 12:13 AM=2C Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote=
:
>
>  Whilst it would be nice if miners in China can carry on forever
> regardless of their internet situation=2C nobody has any inherent "right"=
 to
> mine if they can't do the job - if miners in China can't get the trivial
> amounts of bandwidth required through their firewall and end up being
> outcompeted then OK=2C too bad=2C we'll have to carry on without them.
>
>  But I'm not sure why it should be a big deal. They can always run a node
> on a server in Taiwan and connect the hardware to it via a VPN or so.
>
>

--_9f28659d-6362-4430-9600-4edbf1913243_
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"

<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html=3B charset=3Dutf-8">
</head>
<body>
<div>
<div style=3D"font-family: Calibri=2Csans-serif=3B font-size: 11pt=3B">Ah s=
orry=2C I just thought you were saying doesn't matter which side let 'em bu=
rn.<br>
<br>
If I were the Chinese and people moved to 20mb MAX size blocks and said stu=
ff you=2C I'd just start firing out small coinbase only blocks now=2C if th=
ey truly have &gt=3B50% hashing power and they collaborate chances are they=
 can build a longer chain of just coinbase
 for themselves then the rest of the network doing big blocks. They don't e=
ven have to propagate this chain to you in a hurry right? And then they nev=
er have to receive a 20mb block from you because they have a longer chain w=
ithout 20mb blocks and always ahead
 of your big blocks. As long as it is the longest chain it is Authority so =
let you guys transact your coinbase from the blocks you create etc. then wh=
amo along come the chinese and supply a longer chain of just coinbase only =
blocks which invalidates all your
 previous transactions and gives them all the coinbase they stamped=2C whil=
e invalidating yours.<br>
<br>
But who cares about them right :p</div>
</div>
<div dir=3D"ltr">
<hr>
<span style=3D"font-family: Calibri=2Csans-serif=3B font-size: 11pt=3B font=
-weight: bold=3B">From:
</span><span style=3D"font-family: Calibri=2Csans-serif=3B font-size: 11pt=
=3B"><a href=3D"mailto:wtogami@gmail.com">Warren Togami Jr.</a></span><br>
<span style=3D"font-family: Calibri=2Csans-serif=3B font-size: 11pt=3B font=
-weight: bold=3B">Sent:
</span><span style=3D"font-family: Calibri=2Csans-serif=3B font-size: 11pt=
=3B">=E2=80=8E2/=E2=80=8E06/=E2=80=8E2015 4:19 AM</span><br>
<span style=3D"font-family: Calibri=2Csans-serif=3B font-size: 11pt=3B font=
-weight: bold=3B">Cc:
</span><span style=3D"font-family: Calibri=2Csans-serif=3B font-size: 11pt=
=3B"><a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net">Bitcoin D=
ev</a></span><br>
<span style=3D"font-family: Calibri=2Csans-serif=3B font-size: 11pt=3B font=
-weight: bold=3B">Subject:
</span><span style=3D"font-family: Calibri=2Csans-serif=3B font-size: 11pt=
=3B">Re: [Bitcoin-development] Fwd: Block Size Increase Requirements</span>=
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>
<div dir=3D"ltr">By reversing Mike's language to the reality of the situati=
on I had hoped people would realize how abjectly ignorant and insensitive h=
is statement was.&nbsp=3B I am sorry to those in the community if they misu=
nderstood my post. I thought it was obvious
 that it was sarcasm where I do not seriously believe particular participan=
ts should be excluded.<br>
<div class=3D"x_gmail_extra"><br>
<div class=3D"x_gmail_quote">On Mon=2C Jun 1=2C 2015 at 3:06 AM=2C Thy Shiz=
zle <span dir=3D"ltr">
&lt=3B<a href=3D"mailto:thyshizzle@outlook.com" target=3D"_blank">thyshizzl=
e@outlook.com</a>&gt=3B</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"x_gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex=3B bo=
rder-left-width:1px=3B border-left-color:rgb(204=2C204=2C204)=3B border-lef=
t-style:solid=3B padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div>
<div style=3D"font-family:Calibri=2Csans-serif=3B font-size:11pt">Doesn't m=
ean you should build something that says &quot=3Bfuck you&quot=3B to the co=
mpanies that have invested in farms of ASICS. To say &quot=3BOh yea if they=
 can't mine it how we want stuff 'em&quot=3B is naive. I get decentralisati=
on=2C
 but don't dis incentivise mining. If miners are telling you that you're go=
ing to hurt them=2C esp. Miners that combined hold &gt=3B 50% hashing power=
=2C why would you say too bad so sad? Why not just start stripping bitcoin =
out of adopters wallets? Same thing.</div>
</div>
<div dir=3D"ltr">
<hr>
<span style=3D"font-family:Calibri=2Csans-serif=3B font-size:11pt=3B font-w=
eight:bold">From:
</span><span style=3D"font-family:Calibri=2Csans-serif=3B font-size:11pt"><=
a href=3D"mailto:wtogami@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">Warren Togami Jr.</a>=
</span><br>
<span style=3D"font-family:Calibri=2Csans-serif=3B font-size:11pt=3B font-w=
eight:bold">Sent:
</span><span style=3D"font-family:Calibri=2Csans-serif=3B font-size:11pt">=
=E2=80=8E1/=E2=80=8E06/=E2=80=8E2015 10:30 PM</span><span class=3D""><br>
<span style=3D"font-family:Calibri=2Csans-serif=3B font-size:11pt=3B font-w=
eight:bold">Cc:
</span><span style=3D"font-family:Calibri=2Csans-serif=3B font-size:11pt"><=
a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net" target=3D"_blan=
k">Bitcoin Dev</a></span><br>
<span style=3D"font-family:Calibri=2Csans-serif=3B font-size:11pt=3B font-w=
eight:bold">Subject:
</span><span style=3D"font-family:Calibri=2Csans-serif=3B font-size:11pt">R=
e: [Bitcoin-development] Fwd: Block Size Increase Requirements</span><br>
<br>
</span></div>
<div>
<div class=3D"x_h5">
<div>
<div dir=3D"ltr">
<blockquote style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 40px=3B border:none=3B padding:0px"=
>Whilst it would be nice if miners
<strike>in</strike> <b>outside</b> China can carry on forever regardless of=
 their internet situation=2C nobody has any inherent &quot=3Bright&quot=3B =
to mine if they can't do the job - if miners
<strike>in</strike>&nbsp=3B<b>outside</b> China can't get the trivial amoun=
ts of bandwidth required
<strike>through their firewall</strike> <b>TO THE MAJORITY OF THE HASHRATE<=
/b> and end up being outcompeted then OK=2C too bad=2C we'll have to carry =
on without them.<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div><br>
<div>On Mon=2C Jun 1=2C 2015 at 12:13 AM=2C Mike Hearn <span dir=3D"ltr">&l=
t=3B<a href=3D"mailto:mike@plan99.net" target=3D"_blank">mike@plan99.net</a=
>&gt=3B</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex=3B border-left-width:1px=3B b=
order-left-color:rgb(204=2C204=2C204)=3B border-left-style:solid=3B padding=
-left:1ex">
<div dir=3D"ltr">
<div>Whilst it would be nice if miners in China can carry on forever regard=
less of their internet situation=2C nobody has any inherent &quot=3Bright&q=
uot=3B to mine if they can't do the job - if miners in China can't get the =
trivial amounts of bandwidth required through their
 firewall and end up being outcompeted then OK=2C too bad=2C we'll have to =
carry on without them.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>But I'm not sure why it should be a big deal. They can always run a no=
de on a server in Taiwan and connect the hardware to it via a VPN or so.</d=
iv>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>

--_9f28659d-6362-4430-9600-4edbf1913243_--

--_60d7cc6e-02cd-4743-b043-57ebd3b08e94_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--_60d7cc6e-02cd-4743-b043-57ebd3b08e94_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

--_60d7cc6e-02cd-4743-b043-57ebd3b08e94_--