From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Wwc9F-0000C2-Oi for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 19:00:53 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.213.49 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.213.49; envelope-from=justusranvier@gmail.com; helo=mail-yh0-f49.google.com; Received: from mail-yh0-f49.google.com ([209.85.213.49]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Wwc9D-0007gY-TQ for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 19:00:53 +0000 Received: by mail-yh0-f49.google.com with SMTP id f73so4684417yha.36 for ; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 12:00:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.236.203.225 with SMTP id f61mr37243546yho.51.1402945246422; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 12:00:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.fuckthenavy.net ([198.203.28.43]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id o69sm22032989yho.19.2014.06.16.12.00.44 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 16 Jun 2014 12:00:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.3.139] (119.81.25.208-static.reverse.softlayer.com [119.81.25.208]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.fuckthenavy.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C086D201AA; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 19:00:33 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 14:00:17 -0500 (CDT) From: Justus Ranvier To: Matt Whitlock , Justus Ranvier Message-ID: <422d16e8.kqhkiG.146a60d2382@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1866054.ECx185lXld@crushinator> References: <87aaf81b20e17332175a3fbcd091c317.squirrel@fulvetta.riseup.net> <1801389.9PVWAZniMG@crushinator> <1866054.ECx185lXld@crushinator> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: R2Mail2 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="--R2Mail2896075fc-fd5c-4add-84df-309c02e9ec5a" X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) 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 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (justusranvier[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 MIME_QP_LONG_LINE RAW: Quoted-printable line longer than 76 chars -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: 1Wwc9D-0007gY-TQ Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Incentivizing the running of full nodes X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 19:00:54 -0000 ----R2Mail2896075fc-fd5c-4add-84df-309c02e9ec5a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There can be multiple independent transport networks for Bitcoin. There already is: ipv4, ipv6, Tor, and native_i2p (out of tree patch). As long as multihomed hosts that act as bridges then information will propagate across all of them. -- Justus Ranvier ----------------- sent with R2Mail2 ----- Original Message ----- From: Matt Whitlock Sent: 2014/06/16 - 13:10 To: Mike Hearn , Justus Ranvier Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Incentivizing the running of full nodes > On Monday, 16 June 2014, at 7:59 pm, Mike Hearn wrote: >> > >> > This is a cool idea, but doesn't it generate some perverse incentives? If >> > I'm running a full node and I want to pay CheapAir for some plane tickets, >> > I'll want to pay in the greatest number of individual transactions possible >> >> Peers can calculate rewards based on number of inputs or total kb used: >> you're paying for kilobytes with either coin age or fees no matter what. So >> I think in practice it's not a big deal. > > So effectively, if you pay for your bandwidth/storage usage via fees, then the reward system is constrained by proof of burn, and if you pay for your usage via coin age, then the reward system is constrained by proof of stake. > > Now another concern: won't this proposal increase the likelihood of a network split? The free-market capitalist nodes will want to charge their peers and will kick and ban peers that don't pay up (and will pay their peers to avoid being kicked and banned themselves), whereas the socialist nodes will want all of their peers to feed them transactions out of the goodness of their hearts and will thus necessarily be relegated to connecting only to other altrustic peers. Thus, the network will comprise two incompatible ideological camps, whose nodes won't interconnect. ----R2Mail2896075fc-fd5c-4add-84df-309c02e9ec5a Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: PGP/MIME digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: BCPG v1.47 iQFFBAEBCAAvBQJTnz7BKBxKdXN0dXMgUmFudmllciA8anVzdHVzQGxvY2FsaG9z dC5sb2NhbD4ACgkQw/e7JjhFDbUPEQgAr2P4rhqimdiRa/d8H/OtI7FPFwuLUIxZ Atii4P9CXrnzTFPZYhFiTJq+Ubs4VnNdVJfxaWjc71ji0t4vCpgoy2fIW6HjSkTG LTAJnBKdCRRJBzmXdftmxx5oWSivxH3886RFEsaZob5Hq/cx6nWFjRCAbZfIPwBA lguG8mv1lgYV2tK6xVZ7Bm690cZQ5mqUGFlV0W1Yfps3xKPbzE21oZRGmMDqNNqL 0ZEDPeytOxMb/Zb0chfHR5bsgjUQiZ7PvIQrwq+RVr1P5Ziw75sxMQpCnGI71e4b sJZTh4uM0rE5vQmHhjDhu2sUVnIMUpC4XDDL4n+Pp/sfxubphJ5XGw== =7sEv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ----R2Mail2896075fc-fd5c-4add-84df-309c02e9ec5a--