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
|
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <pete@petertodd.org>) id 1UFoAS-0003eK-1h
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 13 Mar 2013 16:04:40 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org
designates 62.13.149.75 as permitted sender)
client-ip=62.13.149.75; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org;
helo=outmail149075.authsmtp.net;
Received: from outmail149075.authsmtp.net ([62.13.149.75])
by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1UFoAQ-00075A-Oo for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 13 Mar 2013 16:04:40 +0000
Received: from mail-c235.authsmtp.com (mail-c235.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.235])
by punt14.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id r2DG4T85005309;
Wed, 13 Mar 2013 16:04:29 GMT
Received: from savin (76-10-178-109.dsl.teksavvy.com [76.10.178.109])
(authenticated bits=128)
by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id r2DG4MQk038210
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
Wed, 13 Mar 2013 16:04:24 GMT
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 12:04:21 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org>
Message-ID: <20130313160421.GA23566@savin>
References: <201303131256.30144.luke@dashjr.org> <20130313150501.GA14067@savin>
<CAAS2fgT13KOu59O9u+ouQvo9BNUL-0EMeK1i2C980VpdQ41Pbw@mail.gmail.com>
<201303131526.16406.luke@dashjr.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="SLDf9lqlvOQaIe6s"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <201303131526.16406.luke@dashjr.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Server-Quench: ad1b5d8b-8bf7-11e2-b5c5-002590a15da7
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
aQdMdwEUFVQGAgsB AmUbWlJeUFl7W2Y7 bAxPbAVDY01GQQRq
WVdMSlVNFUsqA2h2 AmN/CRlxfwdHeDBx ZURgWj4KCEUocBJ1
EFNcRzsBeGZhPWIC AkULch5UcAFPdx8U a1UrBXRDAzANdhES
HhM4ODE3eDlSNilR RRkIIFQOdA5TWG56 HlgDETgmBiUA
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1023:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 76.10.178.109/587
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
anti-virus system.
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 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
X-Headers-End: 1UFoAQ-00075A-Oo
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.8.1 ideas
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: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 16:04:40 -0000
--SLDf9lqlvOQaIe6s
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 03:26:14PM +0000, Luke-Jr wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 13, 2013 3:18:36 PM Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 8:05 AM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> wrote:
> > > If we're going to consider doing this, at minimum we need to also
> >=20
> > I beg people to not derail discussion about fixing things with
> > discussion of other controversial changes.
>=20
> I figured 2 MB in 2-3 years was fairly uncontroversial.
> If not, let's scrap that idea for now.
The very statement that we're willing to increase the blocksize as our
solution to increased transaction volume rather go down the path of
off-chain transactions is incredibly controversial.
Fuck it, I'll make this public: I've had at least one person who went to
the trouble of finding my personal phone number just so they could leave
a few text messages saying I was going to do serious harm to Bitcoin. At
the same time I've also had a few people asking questions along the line
of had started and/or was considering starting a formal group opposing
the blocksize increase. I even got a significant anonymous donation a
few weeks ago. (rather fittingly this was done by emailing me an
easywallet URL from a throwaway account)
It's not just forum trolls who care about the issue, even if they make
the most noise about it.
--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
--SLDf9lqlvOQaIe6s
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAlFAo4UACgkQpEFN739thowm0ACfR1If0f8iN4HMbJL6BjBKqeYb
i0IAoIRFF+WbGM5gyISleBuGUVIYHAev
=kGAg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--SLDf9lqlvOQaIe6s--
|
