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 1Yz4iO-0008FC-RI for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 31 May 2015 14:59:52 +0000 Received: from mail-wg0-f52.google.com ([74.125.82.52]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Yz4iN-0008QK-L9 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 31 May 2015 14:59:52 +0000 Received: by wgbgq6 with SMTP id gq6so95984657wgb.3 for ; Sun, 31 May 2015 07:59:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=bNJ5pav1XUgyubd7St2QOt+1poJjVdSmWkjN5wGDzng=; b=WajKuUCu5LZoGkDLWBF6kwrj1yG3ctw+gzAcDmv8FgcsK8hpoiiNWT2PsAs5Q64k0l s6Ih6TeB6YORGy9AxT8oYmdEa71FEwldGmzbBWnbI7YirLT3yrp7twMmoHoJKepGki5/ +pXGaUFYuG8VYoojOu9/pzJZOHIn6EkVg6cbMi2ji/NI6rlPUnKcbmDmbN0kbPoPWLBQ RWu+pVMMfCrb0AArx4uggiTGNGpuZf4TCJZUoWW8YjetbC/+9FYDxEoZTy40/H5Tzld9 Zrfr7hb77bykp7Ai+CyeCiBj5tCQvJZ2kHSDGWIK69YH2Tk0qTIOKvAIXlels6OCadqF DxJg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmQ8gXCZHpRdJnirfZxgQZNB+d1facvK79ZGP3N8HkPHFS3QfiFvfwZgxexfDozmT89Q+rN MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.99.69 with SMTP id eo5mr12427337wib.92.1433084385532; Sun, 31 May 2015 07:59:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.139.235 with HTTP; Sun, 31 May 2015 07:59:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.139.235 with HTTP; Sun, 31 May 2015 07:59:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <554BE0E1.5030001@bluematt.me> <5568F567.3050608@bluematt.me> <556A1046.50807@bluematt.me> Date: Sun, 31 May 2015 16:59:45 +0200 Message-ID: From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= To: Gavin Andresen Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04428fccbbb08c051761f500 X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Headers-End: 1Yz4iN-0008QK-L9 Cc: Bitcoin Development Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase Requirements 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: Sun, 31 May 2015 14:59:52 -0000 --f46d04428fccbbb08c051761f500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Whatever...let's use the current subsidies, the same argument applies, it's just 20 + 25 =3D 45 btc per block for miner B vs 27 btc for miner B. Miner B would still go out of business, bigger blocks still mean more mining and validation centralization. The question is how far I we willing to go with this "scaling by sacrificing decentralization", but the answer can't be "that's to far away in the future to worry about it, right now as far as we think we can using orphan rate as the only criterion". On May 31, 2015 4:49 PM, "Gavin Andresen" wrote: > On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n wro= te: > >> Here's a thought experiment: >> >> Subsidy is gone, all the block reward comes from fees. >> > I wrote about long-term hypotheticals and why I think it is a big mistake > to waste time worrying about them here: > http://gavinandresen.ninja/when-the-block-reward-goes-away > > > -- > -- > Gavin Andresen > --f46d04428fccbbb08c051761f500 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Whatever...let's use the current subsidies, the same arg= ument applies, it's just 20 + 25 =3D 45 btc per block for miner B vs 27= btc for miner B.
Miner B would still go out of business, bigger blocks still mean more minin= g and validation centralization. The question is how far I we willing to go= with this "scaling by sacrificing decentralization", but the ans= wer can't be "that's to far away in the future to worry about = it, right now as far as we think we can using orphan rate as the only crite= rion".

On May 31, 2015 4:49 PM, "Gavin Andresen&qu= ot; <gavinandresen@gmail.com<= /a>> wrote:
On Sun, M= ay 31, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <jtimon@jtimon.cc> = wrote:

Here's a thought experi= ment:

Subsidy is gone, all the block reward comes from fees.

I wrote about long-term hypotheticals and why I think it is= a big mistake to waste time worrying about them here:


--
--Gavin Andresen
--f46d04428fccbbb08c051761f500--