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
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <elombrozo@gmail.com>) id 1Z4LYK-0006ub-Pd
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 15 Jun 2015 03:59:16 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.192.172 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.192.172; envelope-from=elombrozo@gmail.com;
helo=mail-pd0-f172.google.com;
Received: from mail-pd0-f172.google.com ([209.85.192.172])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Z4LYJ-0006h3-Oa
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 15 Jun 2015 03:59:16 +0000
Received: by pdjn11 with SMTP id n11so63332659pdj.0
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Sun, 14 Jun 2015 20:59:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.70.94.167 with SMTP id dd7mr45033021pdb.115.1434340750115;
Sun, 14 Jun 2015 20:59:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.102] (cpe-76-167-237-202.san.res.rr.com.
[76.167.237.202])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id v9sm10512878pdr.96.2015.06.14.20.59.07
(version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
Sun, 14 Jun 2015 20:59:08 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2098\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
boundary="Apple-Mail=_40E200EC-6AF7-450D-A20C-F2BAA7744689";
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.5b6
From: Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJHLa0NrNqECvqhJWNX=rt3-h4U3jwFWoMCrcbyC6hUT5EqWbw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2015 20:59:05 -0700
Message-Id: <B90484CB-ECB7-4E71-B085-F914124B17D0@gmail.com>
References: <20150612181153.GB19199@muck>
<CAJN5wHVj=KfQ3_KYOKee9uq4LNPwQ7x5nGuKDHEMUqGF4LSDLg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAFzgq-y5xBSXexVi0mJw_w89R2_AHJCgmj=gLN4CK_-YaO4-eg@mail.gmail.com>
<3BB36FC7-9212-42A1-A756-A66929C15D4F@gmail.com>
<CAJHLa0Oh0wm_1SynFdCu+WkVD-gTGk0ZUNgQV0GVj0-3zL=zzw@mail.gmail.com>
<04527D50-0118-4E74-8226-3E29B29CC7D8@gmail.com>
<CAJHLa0NrNqECvqhJWNX=rt3-h4U3jwFWoMCrcbyC6hUT5EqWbw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2098)
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
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
(elombrozo[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
-0.4 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
X-Headers-End: 1Z4LYJ-0006h3-Oa
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] User vote in blocksize through fees
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, 15 Jun 2015 03:59:16 -0000
--Apple-Mail=_40E200EC-6AF7-450D-A20C-F2BAA7744689
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="Apple-Mail=_94BA69B6-BF2E-495F-A210-2E58C332985E"
--Apple-Mail=_94BA69B6-BF2E-495F-A210-2E58C332985E
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=utf-8
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 1:08 AM, Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com =
<mailto:elombrozo@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 2) BIP100 has direct economic consequences=E2=80=A6and particularly =
for miners. It lends itself to much greater corruptibility.
>=20
>=20
> What is the alternative? Have a Chief Scientist or Technical Advisory =
Board choose what is a proper fee, what is a proper level of =
decentralization, a proper growth factor?
> On Jun 13, 2015, at 10:36 PM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com> wrote:
>=20
> The choice is very real and on-point. What should the block size =
limit be? Why?
>=20
> There is a large consensus that it needs increasing. To what? By =
what factor?
To be clear, Jeff, I am 100% in agreement with you that a mechanism like =
what you=E2=80=99re proposing is a million times better than having high =
priests that ram hard forks without proper consensus. And perhaps given =
the present circumstances it seems like the only alternative. However, =
in my mind this block size limit controversy is actually a fairly =
superficial aspect - a mere symptom, a manifestation of the real =
problem...
What I find somewhat irksome is that we=E2=80=99ve had six years to =
figure out a mechanism to enable hard forks (which we knew from the =
start would be inevitable) - and more to the point, we=E2=80=99ve known =
about this block size issue from the start as well=E2=80=A6and only =
suddenly it becomes an issue of major urgency that we must bump up this =
parameter 20x=E2=80=A6
- Eric Lombrozo
--Apple-Mail=_94BA69B6-BF2E-495F-A210-2E58C332985E
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=utf-8
<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html =
charset=3Dutf-8"></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" =
class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D"">On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at =
1:08 AM, Eric Lombrozo <span dir=3D"ltr" class=3D""><<a =
href=3D"mailto:elombrozo@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank" =
class=3D"">elombrozo@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br =
class=3D""><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div =
class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: =
0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-color: rgb(204, =
204, 204); border-left-style: solid; padding-left: 1ex;">2) BIP100 has =
direct economic consequences=E2=80=A6and particularly for miners. It =
lends itself to much greater corruptibility.<br class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></blockquote><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div =
class=3D"">What is the alternative? Have a Chief Scientist or =
Technical Advisory Board choose what is a proper fee, what is a proper =
level of decentralization, a proper growth =
factor?</div></div></div></blockquote><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div =
class=3D"gmail_quote"><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div =
class=3D""><br class=3D""></div></div></div><div><blockquote type=3D"cite"=
class=3D""><div class=3D"">On Jun 13, 2015, at 10:36 PM, Jeff Garzik =
<<a href=3D"mailto:jgarzik@bitpay.com" =
class=3D"">jgarzik@bitpay.com</a>> wrote:</div><br =
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=3D""><span =
style=3D"font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; =
font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; =
line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; =
text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: =
0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline =
!important;" class=3D"">The choice is very real and on-point. What =
should the block size limit be? Why?</span><div =
style=3D"font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; =
font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; =
line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; =
text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: =
0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div=
style=3D"font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; =
font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; =
line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; =
text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: =
0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=3D"">There is a large =
consensus that it needs increasing. To what? By what =
factor?</div></div></blockquote></div><br class=3D""><div class=3D"">To =
be clear, Jeff, I am 100% in agreement with you that a mechanism like =
what you=E2=80=99re proposing is a million times better than having high =
priests that ram hard forks without proper consensus. And perhaps given =
the present circumstances it seems like the only alternative. However, =
in my mind this block size limit controversy is actually a fairly =
superficial aspect - a mere symptom, a manifestation of the real =
problem...</div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">What =
I find somewhat irksome is that we=E2=80=99ve had six years to figure =
out a mechanism to enable hard forks (which we knew from the start would =
be inevitable) - and more to the point, we=E2=80=99ve known about this =
block size issue from the start as well=E2=80=A6and only suddenly it =
becomes an issue of major urgency that we must bump up this parameter =
20x=E2=80=A6</div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">- =
Eric Lombrozo</div></body></html>=
--Apple-Mail=_94BA69B6-BF2E-495F-A210-2E58C332985E--
--Apple-Mail=_40E200EC-6AF7-450D-A20C-F2BAA7744689
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org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=exMC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--Apple-Mail=_40E200EC-6AF7-450D-A20C-F2BAA7744689--
|
