From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A814499 for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 16:07:44 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from pmx.vmail.no (pmx.vmail.no [193.75.16.11]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97C1C202 for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 16:07:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pmx.vmail.no (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (pmx.isp.as2116.net) with SMTP id A440D404AC for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 18:07:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp.bluecom.no (smtp.bluecom.no [193.75.75.28]) by pmx.vmail.no (pmx.isp.as2116.net) with ESMTP id 5CA384049A for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 18:07:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from coldstorage.localnet (unknown [81.191.185.32]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.bluecom.no (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DAB9AA for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 18:07:41 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Zander To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 18:07:40 +0200 Message-ID: <1689926.ZjkxyJjokn@coldstorage> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.1 (Linux/3.16.0-4-amd64; KDE/4.14.2; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <1B7F00D3-41AE-44BF-818D-EC4EF279DC11@gmail.com> <2905605.OvbZMWuhGy@coldstorage> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Why Satoshi's temporary anti-spam measure isn'ttemporary X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 16:07:44 -0000 On Thursday 30. July 2015 10.24.07 Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev < > > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > What makes you think that when there is such a low availability of > > transaction > > space that paying to be included costs you $10, that Bitcoin is not going > > to > > be outcompeted and replaced or otherwise regarded as worthless? > > Ah, well that's simple. Because any decentralized system is going to have > high transaction costs and scarcity anyway. I've been doing system design for about 10 years and I can understand your initial response. I have to disagree with you, though. Surely decentralized adds an overhead, but in its place it adds replication, redundancy and very cheap expansion of capacity. Remember when we went from single-core CPUs to multi-core (and hyperthreading)? Developers were saying it was useless because all apps were still single-threaded. And now, 15 years later, there are fantastic frameworks to make this easy. Same will happen with distributed. Any assumption you wrote above is not inherent in the technology. -- Thomas Zander