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-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1VqNDM-0005pU-1t for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:19:04 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from serv.jerviss.org ([12.47.47.47] helo=inana.jerviss.org) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) id 1VqNDK-0007Uh-Lr for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:19:04 +0000 Received: from [10.8.2.254] ([192.151.168.109]) (username: kjj authenticated by PLAIN symmetric_key_bits=0) by inana.jerviss.org (8.13.6/8.12.11) with ESMTP id rBADIq6v027056 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 10 Dec 2013 07:18:55 -0600 Message-ID: <52A714BC.1010909@jerviss.org> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 07:18:52 -0600 From: kjj User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.2; WOW64; rv:25.0) Gecko/20100101 SeaMonkey/2.22.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ryan Carboni , bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------060208050109060009000705" Received-SPF: pass (inana.jerviss.org: 192.151.168.109 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism) X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) 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 -0.2 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: bitcointalk.org] 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Headers-End: 1VqNDK-0007Uh-Lr Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoin-development Digest, Vol 31, Issue 25 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: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:19:04 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------060208050109060009000705 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ryan Carboni wrote: > And the economic parameters of bitcoin are not fixed in stone. If > there needs to be a change, it will be messy but it could happen. Need is an awfully big word. One thing we are certain of is that some guy telling us all that we are wrong is nowhere near the "need" level. > Besides, using Austrian precepts of inflation blurs the fact that > deflation will still be possible under my proposal. Although amusingly > enough Austrian-defined inflation is still occurring within Bitcoin, > in fact faster then desired since blocks are being processed every > seven minutes now as opposed to ten, and it's quite likely when 28nm > ASIC miners are released that blocks will be processed every five > minutes before the difficulty is adjusted again. Don't take this the wrong way, but things like this make it very hard for us to take you seriously. Please read up on how the system works, then read up on why we reject the argument from authority, then if you still have something to say, please do so in a proper venue. One option for this discussion is the bitcointalk.org forums, where you will find literally dozens of threads proposing the exact same thing you are proposing. This mailing list is NOT for political discussion. --------------060208050109060009000705 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Ryan Carboni wrote:
And the economic parameters of bitcoin are not fixed in stone. If there needs to be a change, it will be messy but it could happen.

Need is an awfully big word.  One thing we are certain of is that some guy telling us all that we are wrong is nowhere near the "need" level.
Besides, using Austrian precepts of inflation blurs the fact that deflation will still be possible under my proposal. Although amusingly enough Austrian-defined inflation is still occurring within Bitcoin, in fact faster then desired since blocks are being processed every seven minutes now as opposed to ten, and it's quite likely when 28nm ASIC miners are released that blocks will be processed every five minutes before the difficulty is adjusted again.
Don't take this the wrong way, but things like this make it very hard for us to take you seriously.

Please read up on how the system works, then read up on why we reject the argument from authority, then if you still have something to say, please do so in a proper venue.  One option for this discussion is the bitcointalk.org forums, where you will find literally dozens of threads proposing the exact same thing you are proposing.

This mailing list is NOT for political discussion.
--------------060208050109060009000705--