public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Justus Ranvier <justus@openbitcoinprivacyproject.org>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Segregated witness softfork with moderate adoption has very small block size effect
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 11:55:10 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <567599FE.30202@openbitcoinprivacyproject.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b19eb676c18ba451605cb02159541dd9@xbt.hk>


[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 961 bytes --]

On 12/19/2015 10:49 AM, jl2012 via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> I am not convinced that SW softfork should be the *only* short term
> scalability solution

I don't think SW is relevant at all with respect to scalability.

Fraud proofs are extremely important from a security perspective. The
network as it exists now places too much trust in miners. Creating a way
for non-full node clients to reject chains with contain invalid
transactions regardless of how much hashing power produces the invalid
chains is essential for the security of the network.

Adding a fraud proof system into blocks means that other features, like
committed UTXO sets, become less unsafe to deploy.

Solving transaction malleability is a very nice to have feature.

A scalability solution, IMHO, is "how do we buy some time to allow
continue usage growth while working on creating a situation where it
becomes safe to eliminate maximum block size as a consensus rule?"


[-- Attachment #1.2: 0xEAD9E623.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 23699 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 801 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-12-19 17:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-19 16:49 [bitcoin-dev] Segregated witness softfork with moderate adoption has very small block size effect jl2012
2015-12-19 17:43 ` Peter Todd
2015-12-19 18:37   ` Santino Napolitano
2015-12-19 18:48     ` Peter Todd
2015-12-20  3:37   ` Chris Priest
2015-12-19 17:55 ` Justus Ranvier [this message]
2015-12-20  1:19 ` Douglas Roark

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=567599FE.30202@openbitcoinprivacyproject.org \
    --to=justus@openbitcoinprivacyproject.org \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox