blob: 810a5f84c1331c4dcf192d5888c8e29ffe5695a1 (
plain)
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
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1UDepy-00050b-Jh
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 07 Mar 2013 17:42:38 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.214.180 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.214.180; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
helo=mail-ob0-f180.google.com;
Received: from mail-ob0-f180.google.com ([209.85.214.180])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1UDepx-0008L2-Ju
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 07 Mar 2013 17:42:38 +0000
Received: by mail-ob0-f180.google.com with SMTP id ef5so552231obb.39
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Thu, 07 Mar 2013 09:42:32 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.10.3 with SMTP id e3mr26526743oeb.51.1362678152250; Thu,
07 Mar 2013 09:42:32 -0800 (PST)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.76.86.169 with HTTP; Thu, 7 Mar 2013 09:42:32 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20130307110018.GA7491@savin>
References: <20130307110018.GA7491@savin>
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 18:42:32 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 2hOwijOUZj0-XWXHebPi3rgUSu8
Message-ID: <CANEZrP0MHA_Mv37DSv=CLBWLHo_-ajRgNRd1-4EGJ2GZvTxiJQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-)
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
(mh.in.england[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
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
X-Headers-End: 1UDepx-0008L2-Ju
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Large-blocks and censorship
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: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 17:42:38 -0000
To summarize your post - it's another go at arguing for strongly
limited block sizes, this time on the grounds that large blocks make
it easier for $AUTHORITY to censor transactions? Is that right?
|
