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-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Z5tDz-0003VX-PA for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 10:08:39 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of hotmail.com designates 65.55.111.104 as permitted sender) client-ip=65.55.111.104; envelope-from=slashdevnull@hotmail.com; helo=BLU004-OMC2S29.hotmail.com; Received: from blu004-omc2s29.hotmail.com ([65.55.111.104]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) id 1Z5tDy-0002rA-Rq for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 10:08:39 +0000 Received: from BLU436-SMTP59 ([65.55.111.72]) by BLU004-OMC2S29.hotmail.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(7.5.7601.22751); Fri, 19 Jun 2015 03:08:33 -0700 X-TMN: [GegZslVn2gl3bxlcei7ezFl4qtkQT7e0] X-Originating-Email: [slashdevnull@hotmail.com] Message-ID: User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.4.9.150325 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 17:08:19 +0700 From: GC To: Benjamin , Mike Hearn Thread-Topic: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers References: <55828737.6000007@riseup.net> <55831CAB.2080303@jrn.me.uk> <1867667.WXWC1C9quc@crushinator> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Jun 2015 10:08:32.0960 (UTC) FILETIME=[E5F4CC00:01D0AA77] X-Spam-Score: -1.8 (-) 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 (slashdevnull[at]hotmail.com) -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [65.55.111.104 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.3 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Headers-End: 1Z5tDy-0002rA-Rq Cc: Bitcoin Development , Gavin Andresen Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers 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: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 10:08:39 -0000 Benjamin, Timeframe for network congestion and users experiencing service degradation =3D> between now and middle of next year. Timeframe for transaction fees topping block reward fees =3D> many years in the future, based on current ratio of block reward to fees. What is the more pressing requirement now? A working =B3fee market=B2 or a reliable, useful payment network that scales without falling over in the next 2-3 years. On 19/6/15 4:53 pm, "Benjamin" wrote: >Yeah, but increasing block-size is not a longterm solution. Necessary >higher fees are a logical consequence of lower subsidies. Bitcoin was >basically free to use at the beginning because miners got paid with >new coins at the expense of those who already hold coins. Eventually >there needs to be a mechanism which matches supply and demand. > >On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Mike Hearn wrote: >>> Or alternatively, fix the reasons why users would have negative >>> experiences with full blocks >> >> >> It's impossible, Mark. By definition if Bitcoin does not have sufficient >> capacity for everyone's transactions, some users who were using it will >>be >> kicked out to make way for the others. Whether that happens in some >>kind of >> stable organised way or (as with the current code) a fairly chaotic way >> doesn't change the fundamental truth: some users will find their bitcoin >> savings have become uneconomic to spend. >> >> Here's a recent user complaint that provides a preview of coming >> attractions: >> >>=20 >>https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/39r3bi/breadwallet_asking_me_to >>_pay_over_10_network_fee/ >> >>> Hello, I'm just trying to send my small Sarutobi-tips stash (12,159 >>>bits) >>> onto a paper wallet. When I try to send it, a window pops up stating >>> "insufficient funds for bitcoin network fee, reduce payment amount by >>>1,389 >>> bits?" This would be a fee of $0.32 to send my $2.82, leaving me with >>>$2.50. >> >> >> These sorts of complaints will get more frequent and more extreme in the >> coming months. I realise that nobody at Blockstream is in the position >>of >> running an end user facing service, but many of us are .... and we will >>be >> the ones that face the full anger of ordinary users as Bitcoin hits the >> wall. >> >>=20 >>------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>----- >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Bitcoin-development mailing list >> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development >> > >-------------------------------------------------------------------------- >---- >_______________________________________________ >Bitcoin-development mailing list >Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development