public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Thoughts on Forks, Scalability, and other Bitcoin inconveniences.
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2015 12:55:47 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABr1YTdBEUCT2AONBMD-aEh=Opu80H4U0H-4ZFFMg6+jECpCPw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABr1YTfiCx6igG9s6NbdD7pWLuoYSJ1QFcX_RnhbdtX5r=Z5Xg@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2166 bytes --]

I should clarify that by "most use cases" I'm not envisioning a bunch of
cryptogeeks [us, or at least myself and a few of us] happily buying up hard
disks, waiting hours, days, weeks to spawn up new full nodes. I'm
envisioning a world where every person has access to this technology and
finds it practical, convenient, and safe ti use.

- Eric Lombrozo
On Jul 5, 2015 11:50 AM, "Eric Lombrozo" <elombrozo@gmail.com> wrote:

> Blockchain validation has become too expensive to properly secure the
> network as per our original security model. The level of validation
> required to comply with our security model has become completely
> impractical for most use cases. Block space is still cheap only because of
> block reward subsidy (which decreases exponentially with time). The
> economics are already completely jacked - larger blocks will only worsen
> this disparity.
>
> The only practical way for the network to function at present (and what
> has essentially ended up happening, if often tacitly) is by introducing
> trust, in validators, miners, relayers, explorer websites, online wallets,
> etc...which in and of itself wouldn't be the end of the world were it not
> for the fact that the raison d'etre of bitcoin is trustlessness - and the
> security model is very much based on this idea. Because of this, there's
> been a tendency to deny that bitcoin cannot presently scale without trust.
> This is horrible because our entire security model has gone out the
> window...and has been replaced with something that isn't specified at all!
>
> We don't really know the boundaries of our model, as the fork a couple of
> days ago demonstrated. Right now we're basically trusting a few devs and
> some mining pool operators that until now have been willing to cooperate
> for the benefit of the network. It is dangerous to assume this will
> continue perpetually. Even assuming the best intentions, an incident might
> occur that this cooperation cannot easily repair.
>
> We need to either solve the validation cost/bottleneck issue...or we need
> to construct a new security model that takes these trust assumptions into
> account.
>
> - Eric Lombrozo
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2497 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2015-07-05 19:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <CABr1YTf72fdQmTDEHAWVKqvTCLSpJZyiiw4g3ifrY8x5RZ=shQ@mail.gmail.com>
     [not found] ` <CABr1YTfwcOQuNyqO57=jdghTnqt56u6pBvK6+dWbED-4OMh+Ug@mail.gmail.com>
     [not found]   ` <CABr1YTfEEXoQJ4SUtrUki9_WetWbGV7TEB+3usJGQqu-P55kSA@mail.gmail.com>
2015-07-05 18:50     ` [bitcoin-dev] Thoughts on Forks, Scalability, and other Bitcoin inconveniences Eric Lombrozo
2015-07-05 19:55       ` Eric Lombrozo [this message]
2015-07-05 20:33       ` Justus Ranvier
2015-07-05 20:53         ` Eric Lombrozo
2015-07-05 21:05           ` Justus Ranvier
2015-07-05 21:08             ` Eric Lombrozo

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='CABr1YTdBEUCT2AONBMD-aEh=Opu80H4U0H-4ZFFMg6+jECpCPw@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=elombrozo@gmail.com \
    --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