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 B42BC25A for ; Mon, 3 Aug 2015 07:34:22 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-la0-f54.google.com (mail-la0-f54.google.com [209.85.215.54]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F078E89 for ; Mon, 3 Aug 2015 07:34:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: by labsr2 with SMTP id sr2so5374614lab.2 for ; Mon, 03 Aug 2015 00:34:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=honp5obqEwmHXZffqIgkagm29N8897MFeSPiKiYo6nA=; b=yzcJBB02ceyOAdsbbg3Tfk6jf0WGYYtdJfmhDtAtuBofPMGZh8w1siaKuNUMR6A/vg yZrXFjw7GrenQQacWiLUwdXyptnn44fnR5YKvwbGiF57TchEV1z8gegHgE1JjhM076vD 3CcmFuHqpI/1kfVv4t6dIvwUznhLj0GD+XNYc30Bg4OvRDjGt16jeiMVTk3p0P6+quhs bqcqNayO6paj9pLaYar71aspH4XCD3rncsolgKH6Pvby76IovTBT/6tP7Kb5FSVAPiff o6cMMRRphYdmjG0yzNuggMYvEZ8rDwy6Xb8iPW61YZ9FdZMtHpGqF2ifDzBuR/sX0XnZ xG2w== X-Received: by 10.112.161.40 with SMTP id xp8mr15334670lbb.71.1438587260151; Mon, 03 Aug 2015 00:34:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.25.22.25 with HTTP; Mon, 3 Aug 2015 00:34:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <55BF153B.9030001@bitcartel.com> References: <55BF153B.9030001@bitcartel.com> From: Hector Chu Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2015 08:34:00 +0100 Message-ID: To: Simon Liu Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c25f529eaf0e051c633202 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW 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] A reason we can all agree on to increase block size 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: Mon, 03 Aug 2015 07:34:22 -0000 --001a11c25f529eaf0e051c633202 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On 3 August 2015 at 08:16, Simon Liu via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Increasing the block size shouldn't be a problem for Chinese miners. > Five of the largest - F2Pool, Antpool, BW, BTCChina, Huobi - have > already signed a draft agreement indicating they are fine with an > increase to 8 MB: http://www.8btc.com/blocksize-increase-2 What's the current stance of the Chinese pools on Bitcoin XT, should Bitcoin Core refuse to increase the block size to 8 MB in a timely fashion? Would they run it if the economic majority (e.g. Coinbase, Bitpay, etc.) publicly stated their support for big blocks? --001a11c25f529eaf0e051c633202 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 3= August 2015 at 08:16, Simon Liu via bitcoin-dev <bitc= oin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
Increasing the block size shouldn't be a problem for Chi= nese miners.
Five of the largest - F2Pool, Antpool, BW, BTCChina, Huobi - have
already signed a draft agreement indicating they are fine with an
increase to 8 MB: http://www.8btc.com/blocksize-increase-2<= /a>

--001a11c25f529eaf0e051c633202--