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
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
|
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 <raystonn@hotmail.com>) id 1Yy1mj-0004O5-DJ
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 28 May 2015 17:40:01 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of hotmail.com
designates 65.55.34.209 as permitted sender)
client-ip=65.55.34.209; envelope-from=raystonn@hotmail.com;
helo=COL004-OMC4S7.hotmail.com;
Received: from col004-omc4s7.hotmail.com ([65.55.34.209])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Yy1mi-0002na-6B
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 28 May 2015 17:40:01 +0000
Received: from COL131-DS24 ([65.55.34.201]) by COL004-OMC4S7.hotmail.com over
TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(7.5.7601.22751);
Thu, 28 May 2015 10:39:54 -0700
X-TMN: [VTljWkv8VaUkXd9N5IQmlOSDcxTLbGV3]
X-Originating-Email: [raystonn@hotmail.com]
Message-ID: <COL131-DS24FC87C7C6622E23F5EF58CDCA0@phx.gbl>
From: "Raystonn ." <raystonn@hotmail.com>
To: "Gavin Andresen" <gavinandresen@gmail.com>, "Mike Hearn" <mike@plan99.net>
References: <16096345.A1MpJQQkRW@crushinator><CABsx9T3-zxCAagAS0megd06xvG5n-3tUL9NUK9TT3vt7XNL9Tg@mail.gmail.com><CANEZrP3VCaFsW4+gPm2kCJ9z7oVUZYVaeNf=_cJWEWwh4ZxiPQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CABsx9T21zjHyO-nh1aSBM3z4Bg015O0rOfYq7=Sy4mf=QxUVQA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABsx9T21zjHyO-nh1aSBM3z4Bg015O0rOfYq7=Sy4mf=QxUVQA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 10:39:29 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_006C_01D09932.93B6F540"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3555.308
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V15.4.3555.308
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 May 2015 17:39:54.0567 (UTC)
FILETIME=[4EC39570:01D0996D]
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
(raystonn[at]hotmail.com)
-0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust [65.55.34.209 listed in list.dnswl.org]
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
1.0 FREEMAIL_REPLY From and body contain different freemails
1.0 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
X-Headers-End: 1Yy1mi-0002na-6B
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposed alternatives to the 20MB
stepfunction
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, 28 May 2015 17:40:01 -0000
------=_NextPart_000_006C_01D09932.93B6F540
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I agree that developers should avoid imposing economic policy. It is =
dangerous for Bitcoin and the core developers themselves to become such =
a central point of attack for those wishing to disrupt Bitcoin. My =
opinion is these things are better left to a decentralized free market =
anyhow.
From: Gavin Andresen=20
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2015 10:19 AM
To: Mike Hearn=20
Cc: Bitcoin Dev=20
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposed alternatives to the 20MB =
stepfunction
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:
Isn't that a step backwards, then? I see no reason for fee pressure =
to exist at the moment. All it's doing is turning away users for no =
purpose: mining isn't supported by fees, and the tiny fees we use right =
now seem to be good enough to stop penny flooding.
Why not set the max size to be 20x the average size? Why 2x, given you =
just pointed out that'd result in blocks shrinking rather than growing.
Twenty is scary.
And two is a very neutral number: if 50% of hashpower want the max size =
to grow as fast as possible and 50% are dead-set opposed to any increase =
in max size, then half produce blocks 2 times as big, half produce empty =
blocks, and the max size doesn't change. If it was 20, then a small =
minority of miners could force a max size increase. (if it is less than =
2, then a minority of minors can force the block size down)
As for whether there "should" be fee pressure now or not: I have no =
opinion, besides "we should make block propagation faster so there is no =
technical reason for miners to produce tiny blocks." I don't think us =
developers should be deciding things like whether or not fees are too =
high, too low, .....
--=20
--
Gavin Andresen
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-------
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
------=_NextPart_000_006C_01D09932.93B6F540
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<HTML><HEAD></HEAD>
<BODY dir=3Dltr>
<DIV dir=3Dltr>
<DIV style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial'; COLOR: #000000">
<DIV>I agree that developers should avoid imposing economic =
policy. It is=20
dangerous for Bitcoin and the core developers themselves to become such =
a=20
central point of attack for those wishing to disrupt Bitcoin. My =
opinion=20
is these things are better left to a decentralized free market =
anyhow.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D'FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: =
"Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; =
DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt tahoma">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style=3D"font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A =
title=3Dgavinandresen@gmail.com=20
href=3D"mailto:gavinandresen@gmail.com">Gavin Andresen</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, May 28, 2015 10:19 AM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=3Dmike@plan99.net =
href=3D"mailto:mike@plan99.net">Mike=20
Hearn</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Cc:</B> <A title=3Dbitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net=20
href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net">Bitcoin =
Dev</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposed alternatives to =
the 20MB=20
stepfunction</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D'FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: =
"Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; =
DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV dir=3Dltr>
<DIV class=3Dgmail_extra>
<DIV class=3Dgmail_quote>On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Mike Hearn =
<SPAN=20
dir=3Dltr><<A href=3D"mailto:mike@plan99.net"=20
target=3D_blank>mike@plan99.net</A>></SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=3Dgmail_quote=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc =
1px solid">
<DIV dir=3Dltr>
<DIV class=3Dgmail_extra>
<DIV class=3Dgmail_quote>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=3Dgmail_quote=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: =
#ccc 1px solid">
<DIV dir=3Dltr>
<DIV class=3Dgmail_extra>
<DIV class=3Dgmail_quote>
<DIV>Isn't that a step backwards, then? I see no reason for fee =
pressure to=20
exist at the moment. All it's doing is turning away users for no =
purpose:=20
mining isn't supported by fees, and the tiny fees we use right now =
seem to=20
be good enough to stop penny=20
flooding.<BR></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Why not set the max size to be 20x the average size? Why 2x, =
given you=20
just pointed out that'd result in blocks shrinking rather than=20
growing.</DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR>Twenty is =
scary.</DIV>
<DIV class=3Dgmail_extra> </DIV>
<DIV class=3Dgmail_extra>And two is a very neutral number: if 50% of =
hashpower=20
want the max size to grow as fast as possible and 50% are dead-set =
opposed to=20
any increase in max size, then half produce blocks 2 times as big, half =
produce=20
empty blocks, and the max size doesn't change. If it was 20, then a =
small=20
minority of miners could force a max size increase. (if it is less =
than 2,=20
then a minority of minors can force the block size down)</DIV>
<DIV class=3Dgmail_extra>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>As for whether there "should" be fee pressure now or not: I have no =
opinion, besides "we should make block propagation faster so there is no =
technical reason for miners to produce tiny blocks." I don't think us =
developers=20
should be deciding things like whether or not fees are too high, too =
low,=20
.....</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>-- <BR>
<DIV class=3Dgmail_signature>--<BR>Gavin Andresen<BR></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----<BR>
<P>
<HR>
_______________________________________________<BR>Bitcoin-development =
mailing=20
list<BR>Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net<BR>https://lists.source=
forge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development<BR></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY>=
</HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_006C_01D09932.93B6F540--
|
