From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <Peter_R@gmx.com> Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30F1C8EE for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Sun, 15 Nov 2015 04:10:41 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 340E087 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Sun, 15 Nov 2015 04:10:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.50.29] ([69.50.179.106]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx001) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Likl3-1aWKRw1ZjZ-00cwvW; Sun, 15 Nov 2015 05:10:33 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) From: Peter R <peter_r@gmx.com> In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgTuty0OCxJvZwU+BCPXG-VuJxtwCPVMvL7Xbze=OjSSdA@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 20:10:30 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <2C8EBBD8-51B7-4F47-AFFA-3870DBD6C4EA@gmx.com> References: <5631C363.5060705@neomailbox.net> <201510290803.52734.luke@dashjr.org> <5632DE33.7030600@bitcartel.com> <CAAS2fgTga_vTfOKrFu_hEzXSfTfg9FRfJ6aL6ginuGFqnbm7=w@mail.gmail.com> <3CB90C47-293E-4C18-A381-E5203483D68F@gmx.com> <CAAS2fgRdK4bDr3x_y9UpdH234PQSfD7U539HBLA==+hLQJ_7Fw@mail.gmail.com> <571D9B7F-077D-4B80-B577-1C18FF2ECF31@gmx.com> <CAAS2fgTLE1cpDqKTiy0r1VMex7zTAB8tgUC=Y0WXmbNBJL42xQ@mail.gmail.com> <6DAD1D38-A156-4507-B506-BF66F26E6594@gmx.com> <CAAS2fgT+r4aRPe7Qjww6wgbAzkwafN+340pUaVO9F7MZEVY-zA@mail.gmail.com> <13D7C936-4D2E-4BAC-AC61-3DA80581C946@gmx.com> <CAAS2fgTuty0OCxJvZwU+BCPXG-VuJxtwCPVMvL7Xbze=OjSSdA@mail.gmail.com> To: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) Sender: Peter_R@gmx.com X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:pct1v3jUEu0KKP7J5rzpadOArSgVVY8cNBT36At9D7S0j1oU3NC jjLBiU9YZZBgSuaRpLEEqtWKHoWz9Muu/bgnyvEJ6B/+PLjkV6FYPju0CMOA19QiMCYrZNc zTDVdhyBjgIKx6YDP5HkPhVU45KywWqZovTrOHEqnXXKIwT3ZGlxU306xEvn+gG0S0aXPre NS73P59atL5Zvfy197DTQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:jdnPsKTIlZg=:AHkzREYjf2HGCBhR2U2oj0 +VbSAjbglh7Ex2xtSsucTk14V7vRG/2JY2Kesm1RqL83h03j4PyWjnugt3C5F2tnX9U/a6pkF Fp7JpF+aR2WfePJILzsNgseUS/v4ww4WTrp9JouqtW8zAJyJ+vSrljHu3NfAQRH9C96utKc1n C3wQi042ASx6H2sOjXFFRJpEBpnwBybA+7j0jrqNIkVCD9TkG42xCjC67l0AA+Uzx37Z6cvD4 jJY/JqMKClElml0aZkzZUQTwxIiBofIOw61lz38KG4auRfs8AZIlIB5XD7nWXN9ru+hJL2sFZ +Kk82xZO0ayw7iKwJHqmbZXlL7uCksIymZhEcJrXZm5WifTS40xDbG8YDvJN3dMcG9o1ZtXPj mmApTHDB74vcO1KJYMWsFoRfUbLDH/Gz8LiDRwUbmyrTboJofxteGtYjSUzCP3UGbOAdiBBLe gD5BQ9Xcznrsmz/pY5fHCvXdGctl0utkomYcn9X8Au//YxrWcx8ZkYPIXZgvBxEvj9VLm0niW bONWUf+5+2PTO4NFsZDprSU9s75Md81rxZqZuWO9HWnEMa+jF8d6QQnmWmpMIq0cHEzqAa3xU Az0pKqD0RQdsGI1XRA6A9GIdRB8uCBSn+yG4DyQTiCYuSqxX+NoEt6k5TYk5gBPHMJZlHj/Aa K0INY65+dFM88DZKMdGd8Vr/9EdwPQvADhbAAePblb1ut3uYPdnqAnYYGfs8h66GIs/SANtSa 4NOf/EnYgDCP65xHCHdZqCIC4OSL02ZcQc5UymOGhKS6saqfQfJjpIk8CWz1/pIWjB+VC1cil dyrUzlb X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>, telemaco <telemaco@neomailbox.net> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [patch] Switching Bitcoin Core to sqlite db X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>, <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/> List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>, <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2015 04:10:41 -0000 Hi Greg, >> Thank you for conceding on that point. >=20 > You're welcome, but I would have preferred that you instead of your > thanks you would have responded in kind and acknowledged my correction > that other consensus inconsistencies discovered in implementations > thus far (none, that I'm aware of) could be classified as "maybe"; and > in doing so retained a semblance of a connection to a the technical > purposes of this mailing list. I apologize for that, Greg. I have not read enough on the issues you = brought up to comment intelligibly. I should have conceded that you = could very well be correct that those were Type 2 consensus failures. =20= >> I think you=E2=80=99re being intentionally obtuse here: accepting a = block composed entirely of valid transactions that is 1.1 MB is entirely = different than accepting a TX that creates a ten thousand bitcoins out = of thin air. The market would love the former but abhor the later. I = believe you can recognize the difference. >=20 > It is not technically distinct--today; politically-- perhaps, but-- > sorry, no element of your prior message indicated that you were > interested in discussing politics rather than technology; on a mailing > list much more strongly scoped for the latter; I hope you can excuse > me for missing your intention prior to your most recent post. The difference between a 1.1 MB block full of valid transactions and an = invalid TX that creates 10,000 BTC out of thin air is *not* a matter of = =E2=80=9Cpolitics.=E2=80=9D If people could freely award themselves = coins, then Bitcoin would not be money. It=E2=80=99s like saying that = =E2=80=9Ctechnically=E2=80=9D there=E2=80=99s no difference between = picking up a penny from the sidewalk and holding up a bank teller at = gunpoint. Ask the average person: there is more than a =E2=80=9Cpolitical= =E2=80=9D difference between creating coins out of thin air and = increasing the block size limit.=20 =20 > That said, I believe you are privileging your own political > preferences in seeing the one rule of the bitcoin system as > categorically distinct even politically. What rules does Bitcoin obey? What is Bitcoin=E2=80=99s nature? This = brings us to the age-old debate between Rationalism versus Empiricism. Rationalism holds that some propositions are known to be true by = intuition alone and that others are knowable by being deduced from = intuited propositions. The Rationalist may hold the view that Bitcoin = has a 21-million coin limit or a 1 MB block size limit, based on = deductive reasoning from the rules enforced by the Bitcoin Core source = code. Such a Rationalists might believe that the code represents some = immutable truth and then his understanding of Bitcoin follows from = axiomatic deductions from that premise. The Empiricist rejects the Rationalist=E2=80=99s intuition and = deduction, believing instead that knowledge is necessarily a posteriori, = dependent upon observation and sense experience. The Empiricist = questions the notion that Bitcoin has a 21-million coin limit, instead = observing that its money supply grew by 50 BTC per block for the first = 210,000 and then 25 BTC per block ever since. The Empiricist rejects the = idea that Bitcoin has any sort of block size limit, having observed = previous empirical limits collapse in the face of increased demand. I am not convinced that Bitcoin even *has* a block size limit, let alone = that it can enforce one against the invisible hand of the market. =20 > No law of nature leaves the > other criteria I specified less politically negotiable, and we can see > concrete examples all around us -- the notion that funds can be > confiscated via external authority (spending without the owners > signature) is a more or less universal property of other modern > systems of money, that economic controls out to exist to regulate the > supply of money for the good of an economy is another widely deployed > political perspective. You, yourself, recently published a work on the > stable self regulation of block sizes based on mining incentives that > took as its starting premise a bitcoin that was forever inflationary. > Certainly things differ in degrees, but this is not the mailing list > to debate the details of political inertia. You were the one who just brought up politics, Greg. Not I.=20 Best regards, Peter