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
|
Return-Path: <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E9A186
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 4 Aug 2015 17:59:27 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wi0-f175.google.com (mail-wi0-f175.google.com
[209.85.212.175])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC7F71F1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 4 Aug 2015 17:59:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wicgj17 with SMTP id gj17so161268346wic.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 04 Aug 2015 10:59:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=U12v1nLPwTHoJD+aFfKrgisqKIB7DG0I6CsOHsIaHFI=;
b=TDVSEF6Y9ZqFLtc/cqEzFzvsks7ugKlsY3PLzKIAU7mAHr3E1w5oeTgaoEKzOCco+r
pnIrklQ48UrWiYnOlhfo3CYOmyolvCOUdMNsjV/yqwDBJXBEBl4bO+GVtao5F9h6sibV
0gwNTUsMAZM3l5xyi1ReBRGpyilmgko9bOoFffm7jqW9BXOMKCXHzMPDczAVaQY1VHSk
M26TpoV39RUG1FTnueGyOQ1HvQrLuCSv1Szl/KJls+Dt3b/YCuEgsrfuxb4AVN+ZJ51C
d6u2eh/N/l0PcELswXbagkKPuXx/rbFMj3ZvNqnN9XcrNlv4XidIi8XYcQ4Eu8azyC4M
IMdw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkZcys+6G3QbqKgjDj8qOAZ2SI3xsR8f6cCbqZ6rVV+s2V2CJoS9vDXukWJhiuEQExp2Bmv
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.181.13.195 with SMTP id fa3mr10395252wid.7.1438711165415;
Tue, 04 Aug 2015 10:59:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.31.230 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Aug 2015 10:59:25 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAAO2FKF3fpiKJYBm=xmCgJwKNydupdZVMw2AMW-WCfWbuVhFHQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPg+sBj-wA1DMrwkQRWnzQoB5NR-q=2-5=WDAAUYfSpXRZSTqw@mail.gmail.com>
<CABsx9T1NqBX9Tr8vRCtCeri76e0wrtkvRhEPyG9Advv_3Uqxng@mail.gmail.com>
<CAPg+sBjwVxYTOn3+bwahHGSGpBh5BCh5b4OOFkw_2x97YZSFPQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+w+GKS_wDDgf=HjPgD5QZ_wdTRg7i_oYUgBRmh9HpufETAP=w@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDqvpWdHdjo1OBzbw-6ivu5DEGcfvK8duc3-KAjsSeWapA@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+w+GKRPPcgCO0pBP2PjKGU49tWuBoF1vRJzY+4fWn71HOVDPw@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDqV1NdHJZBmUWX3AxVYy6ErU7AB-wsWgGzbiTL1twdq6g@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+w+GKTLBWj6b4ppwrmnXb_gybYFcrX7haLBSdCnMaijy2An4w@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDpWPhYNh=g-ZXCsfe-aPq=N6NKSWKP9kr-KtPVrWAxB7Q@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAO2FKHsczkwwqO87cJFtxBp9JE=vf=GcxLx37GpRUkPq8VGHQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAPg+sBjvzxGAPvk6PEhuxWzg00+krY_+goZbCLTWngvrCVCKvA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAO2FKFD8X9o3R9KRXdFiBmSiFRm4fHtS7YAJNygMFv5UAY3hg@mail.gmail.com>
<CABm2gDqU=nxXP1YACLJRRSoe26yW7vbkw9WvHrOu2=euELcemw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAO2FKF3fpiKJYBm=xmCgJwKNydupdZVMw2AMW-WCfWbuVhFHQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2015 19:59:25 +0200
Message-ID: <CABm2gDq4iWSpP7j4DhQrT41SptL4gm_5+7EcNgzy23rrapO7xw@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
To: Hector Chu <hectorchu@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,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] Block size following technological growth
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: Tue, 04 Aug 2015 17:59:27 -0000
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Hector Chu <hectorchu@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4 August 2015 at 14:13, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <jtimon@jtimon.cc> wrote:
>>
>> 2) It doesn't matter who is to blame about the current centralization:
>> the fact remains that the blocksize maximum is the only** consensus
>> rule to limit mining centralization.
>
>
> Repeating a claim ad-nauseum doesn't make it necessarily true. A block si=
ze
> limit won't prevent miners in the future from buying each other out.
But reading it 10 times may help you understand the claim, you will
never find out until you try.
"Miners buying each other out" is not the only way in which mining
centralization can get even worse.
A Blocksize limit may not be able to prevent such a scenario, but it's
still the only consensus tool to limit mining centralization.
If you want to prove that claim wrong you need to find a
counter-example of another consensus rule that somehow limits mining
centralization.
You could also prove that this rule doesn't help with mining
centralization at all. But that's much more difficult and if you just
claim it (and consequently advocate for the complete removal of the
consensus rule) we will have already advanced a lot.
But you denying that the limits serves limiting mining centralization
and at the same time advocating for keeping a limit at all doesn't
seem very consistent.
If you don't want that rule to limit mining centralization pressures,
what do you want it for?
|
