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 BA2118A8 for ; Thu, 6 Aug 2015 16:04:00 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-lb0-f181.google.com (mail-lb0-f181.google.com [209.85.217.181]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ABDCB16F for ; Thu, 6 Aug 2015 16:03:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by lbbtg9 with SMTP id tg9so7722411lbb.1 for ; Thu, 06 Aug 2015 09:03:58 -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=GsYN5Lw/r4M0GX2IGD3y7C14KhOREDyxs6UTDxDLdX0=; b=iP5ZZdyyYXi4k1+ro7SrGUPBwjAx3U1oyQ/Z420ycCJ7jRyjgT1hCrfJO5k3R0qC8B 6r/1sj9ACZ/ddNgAsI+eS4ZGLIQjFWXw6b8cpP1R1xNCwDd1u44nTdZvjy1B+L7SCYaW 5/eAR1ppjHhBp++d8VC5rArIewklkgjAOh2dMlrYfMoh39uT9mXwViZBigGBonnEA/Xn giR0fGdP/f3lhAfFin55XVs3jyrWM75T1FQEhwSNvmnF0qyXrMeLM++/G8KjyW3cCYb9 JF4cZDkYOqlOAx1m3EDNyiApsUCZmwZwIh8fcFX+RkV1xAYow+2itNxQhBEnI/p72Wav huLA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.43.41 with SMTP id t9mr2948423lal.4.1438877037848; Thu, 06 Aug 2015 09:03:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.25.143.195 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Aug 2015 09:03:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2015 12:03:57 -0400 Message-ID: From: Gavin Andresen To: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c27f40b77067051ca6aa9c 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] Block size following technological growth 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, 06 Aug 2015 16:04:00 -0000 --001a11c27f40b77067051ca6aa9c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n wrote: > 1) If "not now" when will it be a good time to let fees rise above zero? > Fees are already above zero. See http://gavinandresen.ninja/the-myth-of-not-full-blocks > 2) When will you consider a size to be too dangerous for centralization? > In other words, why 20 GB would have been safe but 21 GB wouldn't have > been (or the respective maximums and respective +1 for each block > increase proposal)? > http://gavinandresen.ninja/does-more-transactions-necessarily-mean-more-cen= tralized 3) Does this mean that you would be in favor of completely removing > the consensus rule that limits mining centralization by imposing an > artificial (like any other consensus rule) block size maximum? > I don't believe that the maximum block size has much at all to do with mining centralization, so I don't accept the premise of the question. --=20 -- Gavin Andresen --001a11c27f40b77067051ca6aa9c Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On T= hu, Aug 6, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <jtimon@jtimon.cc> wrote:
1) If "not now" when will it be a good= time to let fees rise above zero?

Fees are already above zero. See=C2=A0http://gavinandresen.ninja/the-myth-of-not-= full-blocks
=C2=A0
2) When will you consider a size to be too dangerous for centralization? In other words, why 20 GB would have been safe but 21 GB wouldn't have<= br> been (or the respective maximums and respective +1 for each block
increase proposal)?


3) Does this mean= that you would be in favor of completely removing
the consensus rule that limits mining centralization by imposing an
artificial (like any other consensus rule) block size maximum?

I don't believe that the maximum block size has muc= h at all to do with mining centralization, so I don't accept the premis= e of the question.

--
--
Gavin Andresen
--001a11c27f40b77067051ca6aa9c--