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 1BE34487 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2015 19:35:13 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-lb0-f172.google.com (mail-lb0-f172.google.com [209.85.217.172]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 73684180 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2015 19:35:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by lbbyj8 with SMTP id yj8so1405276lbb.0 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2015 12:35:10 -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=y3kmtLz8PJ7+xTfoEw/f3yA/EYaP9HvHPDI2CLca5Q4=; b=WoRIY9u+2dinqXbJbIqRP0U9CzPEIPMOWedkHqCAubyrvj88hgWySD+0p3s0+wGGqb L9RbJfXOM94HeNdnfYS1ogczHOIuTC43RuJs8rbX8uR6VDlFwWdUMRlKqREPMR4R7qxm KItgKxxZh8bTuT7VJVB9U3LCMJ3vX/kVZVNvQZy6+VG1zoZqIO41OIEK/L8XSn+3GB+/ bvFVcjQLtMKknkHdsSGmd7okjZ6+rfycl445yRaLldwcgUNoMirRyRsNFTxASFbym0ny viQ3zuBqL5R30AYF1oLqP5+FozCNZHcmgYkH9yZLhWCa14yjZ2Ru2MqK0WzNJPfR+A/O mP2A== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.147.201 with SMTP id tm9mr9730125lbb.40.1437680110526; Thu, 23 Jul 2015 12:35:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.25.90.75 with HTTP; Thu, 23 Jul 2015 12:35:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6F436293-9E2B-461C-B105-FC4CF9EBFC69@gmail.com> References: <55B113AF.40500@thinlink.com> <6F436293-9E2B-461C-B105-FC4CF9EBFC69@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 15:35:10 -0400 Message-ID: From: Gavin Andresen To: Eric Lombrozo Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b34391a49e896051b8ffc3f 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@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core and hard forks 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: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 19:35:13 -0000 --047d7b34391a49e896051b8ffc3f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Eric Lombrozo wrote: > Mainstream usage of cryptocurrency will be enabled primarily by direct > party-to-party contract negotiation=E2=80=A6with the use of the blockchai= n > primarily as a dispute resolution mechanism. The block size isn=E2=80=99t= about > scaling but about supply and demand of finite resources. As demand for > block space increases, we can address it either by increasing computation= al > resources (block size) or by increasing fees. But to do the former we nee= d > a way to offset the increase in cost by making sure that those who > contribute said resources have incentive to do so. There are so many things wrong with this paragraph I just can't let it slide. "Mainstream usage will be enabled primarily by..." Maybe. Maybe not, we don't know what use case(s) will primarily take cryptocurrency mainstream. I believe it is a big mistake to pick one and bet "THIS is going to be the winner". "we can address it either by... or..." False dichotomy. There are lots of things we can do to decrease costs, and a lot of things have ALREADY been done (e.g. running a pruned full node). I HATE the "it must be this or that" "us or them" attitude, it fosters unproductive bickering and negativity. (and yes, I'm human, I'm sure you can find instances in the recent past where I did it, too... mea culpa) --=20 -- Gavin Andresen --047d7b34391a49e896051b8ffc3f Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

= On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com&= gt; wrote:
Mainstream usage of cry= ptocurrency will be enabled primarily by direct party-to-party contract neg= otiation=E2=80=A6with the use of the blockchain primarily as a dispute reso= lution mechanism. The block size isn=E2=80=99t about scaling but about supp= ly and demand of finite resources. As demand for block space increases, we = can address it either by increasing computational resources (block size) or= by increasing fees. But to do the former we need a way to offset the incre= ase in cost by making sure that those who contribute said resources have in= centive to do so.

There are so many things wrong with= this paragraph I just can't let it slide.

"Mainstream usage will be ena= bled primarily by..." =C2=A0Maybe. Maybe not, we don't know what u= se case(s) will primarily take cryptocurrency mainstream. I believe it is a= big mistake to pick one and bet "THIS is going to be the winner"= .

&quo= t;we can address it either by... or..." =C2=A0False dichotomy. There a= re lots of things we can do to decrease costs, and a lot of things have ALR= EADY been done (e.g. running a pruned full node).=C2=A0 I HATE the "it= must be this or that" "us or them" attitude, it fosters unp= roductive bickering and negativity.

(and yes, I'm human, I'm sure you can= find instances in the recent past where I did it, too... mea culpa)
<= div class=3D"gmail_extra">
--
--
Gavin Andresen

--047d7b34391a49e896051b8ffc3f--