From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3CF4E10DC
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Thu,  3 Sep 2015 06:57:45 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-io0-f173.google.com (mail-io0-f173.google.com
	[209.85.223.173])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB22F103
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Thu,  3 Sep 2015 06:57:44 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by ioiz6 with SMTP id z6so47487948ioi.2
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Wed, 02 Sep 2015 23:57:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:cc:content-type;
	bh=e0r5dd4fs5xQdsyKFYANTcfPAKzgCoWM/sbzj2twcNs=;
	b=t90ZzUpJix1alxADA1JrSMd7/F+ajUBiv9sCtbiDrF3YkLuX37/2/xnp5/Li91JLow
	v98L5R+PRzJ58I+jk0YcD1KPPvAbbTd9MFKqubaV8/YErazaMsGcmKMo3f3Q5/ZuJiNJ
	8YP66oVZo1a4N/IkrCDZSSrruGUTbe2U29mq7W6rr92Zz4zNZXYqHFmn2b/ozbLK5csb
	uS4Xs5ON7x/F9+gEfBTbWYK/j9xqpqSnhKkqoSjikEQO7jpR9ur/YjideOD4DfHO3e3Q
	17dHgKt9ec3sFQopCTSr4GOKttrtYg4lcN/YO5KMECibfEKgQqwRsvVmrjPYyf+cJtJ/
	1Hcw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.167.213 with SMTP id q204mr18201176ioe.150.1441263464213;
	Wed, 02 Sep 2015 23:57:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.107.19.30 with HTTP; Wed, 2 Sep 2015 23:57:44 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CADm_Wcb+5Xo3HS-FNUYtCapVpYfVvUS_fxpU0Q=TZHJW1=iAFQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADm_Wcb+5Xo3HS-FNUYtCapVpYfVvUS_fxpU0Q=TZHJW1=iAFQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 06:57:44 +0000
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgQOi0amBnPK8Ac3iGDN9CP-mLW6o0ncYdSAOAaqSboejg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM,
	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 development mailing list <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] block size - pay with difficulty
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2015 06:57:45 -0000

On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 4:05 AM, Jeff Garzik via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> (b) requiring miners to have idle
> hashpower on hand to change block size are both unrealistic and potentially

I really cannot figure out how you could characterize pay with
difficty has in any way involving idle hashpower.

Can you walk me through this?