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 294571BB for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 09:05:27 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mx1.riseup.net (mx1.riseup.net [198.252.153.129]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0486DEA for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 09:05:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from piha.riseup.net (unknown [10.0.1.162]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.riseup.net", Issuer "COMODO RSA Domain Validation Secure Server CA" (verified OK)) by mx1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B03440DA5; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 09:05:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=riseup.net; s=squak; t=1438247125; bh=Z+RAFSYcOwAB18eI6vsXP2dmfx4PZVPk6zt4XRtB/eY=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=V7AtEYfavcpJYxmzymtvBoJp/5cbxHvsfltOMFSStmDNFTVGHBarsZeH2lifK1K2/ w36uZQbQuIDYUNVIeFh8X5+nbs+6Y5M07hz8BMTdnLwEcheAd3+pLDQ99k9AmVizHR r7MzT+u23KlZDMoTGQkbjm8k0oofQhNk4us4y5F8= Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (Authenticated sender: odinn.cyberguerrilla) with ESMTPSA id 8D148141C63 Message-ID: <55B9E8D3.9010204@riseup.net> Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 02:05:23 -0700 From: odinn User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mike Hearn , Gregory Maxwell References: <1B7F00D3-41AE-44BF-818D-EC4EF279DC11@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.98.7 at mx1 X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RP_MATCHES_RCVD, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY 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 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Why Satoshi's temporary anti-spam measure isn't temporary 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 09:05:27 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Mike, tone it down, please, when I read your stuff it's like you are drinking too much Red bull or something. On 07/29/2015 11:03 AM, Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev wrote: > It was _well_ .... understood that the users of Bitcoin would wish > to protect its decenteralization by limiting the size of the chain > to keep it verifyable on small devices. > > > No it wasn't. That is something you invented yourself much later. > "Small devices" isn't even defined anywhere, so there can't have > been any such understanding. > > The actual understanding was the opposite. Satoshi's words: > > "At first, most users would run network nodes, but as the network > grows beyond a certain point, it would be left more and more to > specialists with server farms of specialized hardware." > > That is from 2008: > > > http://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/emails/cryptography/2/#selection- 75.16-83.14 > > > Then he went on to talk about Moore's law and streaming HD videos > and the like. At no point did he ever talk about limiting the > system for "small devices". > > I have been both working on and using Bitcoin for longer than you > have been around, Gregory. Please don't attempt to bullshit me > about what the plan was. And stop obscuring what this is about. > It's not some personality cult - the reason I keep beating you over > the head with Satoshi's words is because it's that founding vision > of the project that brought everyone together, and gave us all a > shared goal. > > If Satoshi had said from the start, > > "Bitcoin cannot ever scale. So I intend it to be heavily limited > and used only by a handful of people for rare transactions. I > picked 1mb as an arbitrary limit to ensure it never gets popular." > > ... then I'd have not bothered getting involved. I'd have said, > huh, I don't really feel like putting effort into a system that is > intended to NOT be popular. And so would many other people. > > > Don't think you can claim otherwise, because doing so is flat out > wrong. > > > I just did claim otherwise and no, I am not wrong at all. > > (Which, incidentially, is insanely toxic to any security argument > for SPV; ---- and now we see the market failure that results from > your and Gavin years long campaign to ignore problems in the mining > ecosystem: > > > Since when have we "campaigned" to "ignore problems" in the mining > ecosystem? What does that even mean? Was it not I who wrote this > blog post? > > > http://blog.bitcoinfoundation.org/mining-decentralisation-the-low-hang ing-fruit/ > > Gregory, you are getting really crazy now. Stop it. The trend > towards mining centralisation is not the fault of Gavin or myself, > or anyone else. And SPV is exactly what was always intended to be > used. It's not something I "fixated" on, it's right there in the > white paper. Satoshi even encouraged me to keep working on bitcoinj > before he left! > > > Look, it's clear you have decided that the way Bitcoin was meant > to evolve isn't to your personal liking. That's fine. Go make an > alt coin where your founding documents state that it's intended to > always run on a 2015 Raspberry Pi, or whatever it is you mean by > "small device". Remove SPV capability from the protocol so everyone > has to fully validate. Make sure that's the understanding that > everyone has from day one about what your alt coin is for. Then > when someone says, gee, it'd be nice if we had some more capacity, > you or someone else can go point at the announcement emails and say > "no, GregCoin is meant to always be verifiable on small devices, > that's our social contract and it's written into the consensus > rules for that reason". > > But your attempt to convert Bitcoin into that altcoin by exploiting > a temporary hack is desperate, and deeply upsetting to many people. > Not many quit their jobs and created companies to build products > only for today's tiny user base. > > > My list of "things a full node is useful for" wasn't ordered by > importance, by the way. > > > _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing > list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > - -- http://abis.io ~ "a protocol concept to enable decentralization and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good" https://keybase.io/odinn -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVuejTAAoJEGxwq/inSG8CKigH+gJpevuZ/mbCy9cjhLvX6VT/ NBQjU82EPDkMkASqoQOekIBOrgODBcN8HsR1xnPHYZYh9HmMaQ/kZDZI3EUP76CU s1vvL0AQC11b0aai+z1K5XU6xK+HxRewujBj9lKtH/JuRUHoKUrRIn/5KxT6Nb5+ OXCpoXKnynfu7T57RrVBOKCPW0Oo7jay9owjDzy+J/ATfqqPDB++7nDbPPVzyrNs 6TlHaC/CxRcq832lwBe1KwaX4A7KFiqHwWoK5/R7Ccyj5X21nHXnDOuXLqwOfGtH 1aARAQ6dqHor5Kw9/Y7yAdoNnrK3XYR80Qdr6I77f3X2B40GdnBiBOSUpoQNAB0= =nRef -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----