On Jul 23, 2015, at 12:35 PM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com> wrote:

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com> wrote:

Mainstream usage of cryptocurrency will be enabled primarily by direct party-to-party contract negotiation…with the use of the blockchain primarily as a dispute resolution mechanism. The block size isn’t about scaling but about supply and demand of finite resources. As demand for block space increases, we can address it either by increasing computational resources (block size) or by increasing fees. But to do the former we need a way to offset the increase in cost by making sure that those who contribute said resources have incentive to do so.

There are so many things wrong with this paragraph I just can't let it slide.

"Mainstream usage will be enabled primarily by..."  Maybe. Maybe not, we don't know what use case(s) will primarily take cryptocurrency mainstream. I believe it is a big mistake to pick one and bet "THIS is going to be the winner".

"we can address it either by... or..."  False dichotomy. There are lots of things we can do to decrease costs, and a lot of things have ALREADY been done (e.g. running a pruned full node).  I HATE the "it must be this or that" "us or them" attitude, it fosters unproductive bickering and negativity.

(and yes, I'm human, I'm sure you can find instances in the recent past where I did it, too... mea culpa)

--

--
Gavin Andresen