From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Z01cH-0006dV-A8 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 03 Jun 2015 05:53:29 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of yahoo.com designates 67.195.87.236 as permitted sender) client-ip=67.195.87.236; envelope-from=rdwnj@yahoo.com; helo=nm49-vm6.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com; Received: from nm49-vm6.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com ([67.195.87.236]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Z01cG-0008UC-2q for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 03 Jun 2015 05:53:29 +0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by nm49.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 03 Jun 2015 05:53:22 -0000 Received: from [98.137.12.174] by nm49.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 03 Jun 2015 05:50:33 -0000 Received: from [98.137.12.202] by tm13.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 03 Jun 2015 05:50:33 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1010.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 03 Jun 2015 05:50:33 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-4 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 808268.11270.bm@omp1010.mail.gq1.yahoo.com X-YMail-OSG: HCo_MLMVM1kyVJBV.9aDDfmTYFMd285.Fx4P5.IU_6C9vSLqy1z8vCz_j4cDRIR XmF3e05B6X2SnADFIZgmfrfeJDdCDUcRexC0btdh6BGYksRU2l_iOZKdt_.BkQz2EO1E.1wIFWfA JqLdiA56jMpVMIDTq4oLy2u5thlfv8M3eeAdL.TRJAji9Bdge_LokRTdQrg511rA.xiZiWnINazT iwW2qa0ndCeVhfnzRiSRixSJ6CuKL7hLVaNiGjEkVm1oFSnygJkySUxP2B7Fsx.W8h55dF7VCs73 RSoqPlDPbCUJxhgnzwTzsuTwfYafRCllY6PMZz4zSMJEKJFTS.5Sc0h0XK540H13g._AJ3J2pedh PS4Yl_sQ5WGaz8Hj4U1mQTTCCaaxyaB.UOZgokftg3LHezDonvUxCGznkHbRNVcAyBTAuwX95S.a SQ8GafKX_XSB97JWNyANOUOXeRpMyOWF8arJfdw5G3TezIIBJ.pKZO1bF8hDNU8BjM6iA4mW9hCR fzsC8QWuNSaA2 Received: by 98.137.12.54; Wed, 03 Jun 2015 05:50:33 +0000 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2015 05:50:32 +0000 (UTC) From: Ron To: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net" Message-ID: <2122164151.2048223.1433310632572.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_2048222_1625053647.1433310632569" X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. 1.0 HK_RANDOM_REPLYTO Reply-To username looks random 1.0 HK_RANDOM_FROM From username looks random -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.6 HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM Envelope sender username looks random 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (rdwnj[at]yahoo.com) -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [67.195.87.236 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1Z01cG-0008UC-2q Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoin-development Digest, Vol 49, Issue 16 X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: Ron List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2015 05:53:29 -0000 ------=_Part_2048222_1625053647.1433310632569 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Bitcoin-development Digest, Vol 49, Issue 16 =C2=A0 1. Re: Proposed alternatives to the 20MB step (Eric Voskuil) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2015 17:09:10 -0700 From: Eric Voskuil Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposed alternatives to the 20MB =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 step To: Mike Hearn , J?r?me Legoupil =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 Cc: Bitcoin Dev Message-ID: <556CF426.3030204@voskuil.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"iso-8859-1" On 06/01/2015 08:55 AM, Mike Hearn wrote: >> Decentralization is the core of Bitcoin's security model and thus that's what gives Bitcoin its value. > No. Usage is what gives Bitcoin value. Nonsense. Visa, Dollar, Euro, Yuan, Peso have usage. The value in Bitcoin is *despite* it's far lesser usage. Yes, the price is a function of demand, but demand is a function of utility. Despite orders of magnitude less usage than state currencies, Bitcoin has utility. This premium *only* exists due to its lack of centralized control. I would not work full time, or at all, on Bitcoin if it was not for decentralization; nor would I hold any of it. I doubt anyone would show an interest in Bitcoin if it was not decentralized. If it centralized even you would be forced to find something else to do, because Bitcoin "usage" would drop to zero. > It's kind of maddening that I have to point this out. Decentralisation is a means to an end. No, it was/is the primary objective. ... e ________________________________________________________I agree Eric, but I= would add that demand is more a function of one's=C2=A0 lack=C2=A0of faith= in one's government and its fiat currency.=C2=A0 The value of Bitcoin is= =20 its independence and constancy.=C2=A0 Its value doesn't change, only the wo= rth=20 or worthlessness of corrupt states and their currencies that it's compared= =20 to / exchanged with.=C2=A0 I hesitate to say money since money is supposed = to=20 be a store of value over time. Ron ------=_Part_2048222_1625053647.1433310632569 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Subject: Bitcoin-development Digest, Vol 49, Issu= e 16
  1. Re: Proposed alternatives to the 20MB step = (Eric Voskuil)
---------------------------------------------------------= -------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2015 17:09:10 -0700From: Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-deve= lopment] Proposed alternatives to the 20MB
    step
To= : Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>= , J?r?me Legoupil
    <jjlegoupil@gmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Message-ID: <556CF426.3030204@= voskuil.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"iso-8859-1"
=
On 06/01/2015 08:55 AM, Mike Hearn wrote:
>> Decentralization = is the core of Bitcoin's security model and thus
that's what gives Bitco= in its value.
> No. Usage is what gives Bitcoin value.

Nonsens= e.

Visa, Dollar, Euro, Yuan, Peso have usage.

The value in Bi= tcoin is *despite* it's far lesser usage.

Yes, the price is a functi= on of demand, but demand is a function of
utility. Despite orders of mag= nitude less usage than state currencies,
Bitcoin has utility. This premi= um *only* exists due to its lack of
centralized control. I would not wor= k full time, or at all, on Bitcoin
if it was not for decentralization; n= or would I hold any of it. I doubt
anyone would show an interest in Bitc= oin if it was not decentralized. If
it centralized even you would be for= ced to find something else to do,
because Bitcoin "usage" would drop to = zero.

> It's kind of maddening that I have to point this out. Dec= entralisation
is a means to an end.

No, it was/is the primary objective.
...
e
_______________________________________________________= _
I agree Eri= c, but I would add that demand is more a function of one's  lack =
of faith in = one's government and its fiat currency.  The value of Bitcoin is
<= /div>
its independe= nce and constancy.  Its value doesn't change, only the worth
or worthlessness = of corrupt states and their currencies that it's compared
to / exchanged with. = ; I hesitate to say money since money is supposed to
be a store of value over time.=

Ron



------=_Part_2048222_1625053647.1433310632569--