public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
To: John Dillon <john.dillon892@googlemail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: Vote on the blocksize limit with proof-of-stake voting
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 10:39:09 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKaEYhJd==3qL3G326xo---Cw+i8X256ZyOppCumnLKYkqy-jg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPaL=UUNMzBUD4FToh72H_YYpZ5X3zCCkOdyX1_8CB7fR9Ec5Q@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2275 bytes --]

On 10 June 2013 10:26, John Dillon <john.dillon892@googlemail.com> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Melvin Carvalho
> <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
> > -1
> >
> > Firstly I appreciate the ingenious thought that went into this post.
> >
> > However, Bitcoin's fundamental philosophy was one CPU one vote.
>
> Indeed it was. Which is why as GPU's came onto the scene Satoshi was
> strongly
> against them. I have to wonder what he thinks of ASICs where just a
> handful of
> companies control the supply of Bitcoin hashing power.
>

Thanks for your reply.  Do you have a pointer to Satoshi being strongly
against GPU?  I'd be interested to see that.  FWIW, I've read all his forum
posts a few times, I just dont recall this one, tho I'm sure it's there...


>
> Satoshi also never forsaw pools, which are why just 2 or 3 people control
> the
> majority of Bitcoin hashing power.
>
> > The asymmetry lies in psychological terms, in that new defaults tend to
> be
> > adopted 80% of the time, so core devs have disproportionate amount of
> power
> > as things stand.
>
> That's why I'm very clear that doing nothing is a vote for the status quo.
> Of
> course wallet authors can do what they want to try to get users to vote
> according to their wishes, or for that matter simply steal your vote, but
> we
> already must put a lot of faith into wallets to not steal our funds.
>
> > Unless there's a very good reason not to, e.g. miners are clearly abusing
> > the system, we should stick with 1 CPU one vote.
>
> People are proposing we put control of the blocksize entirely into the
> hands of
> miners, yet we all have an interest in auditing the blocks miners produce.
> There must be balance.
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJRtY2jAAoJEEWCsU4mNhiPQEsH/0VNA7aJYdUbJjTnIiKoaCv3
> JtWS1MKHjAJE6ZPDt+T/QPkEdZI4kNz3DGcZL6EDJtvZxZHfvEIaZDF1gpaH6OkC
> oIZ0PkFPOxi0cncuAvT/a770evu7LzuT6fisY3EgGnlHujLQZ47LEa73Xo7pJVc7
> RJHamGwkj+3HZRIuZIAn87qws/zRyTx5SXvb56xCKb0oxE4ZO0dn+8/nNSPWw13i
> p3LpLlEQBBu+Du2nPSQupRjkz4MPP8v9EYefV5cjtNBK7ufAvA64OnwKB5dST+h+
> N/vBcj3EIj/WEOf4myGcVxKp+skJ2SJDwxLigevgkKYPDNTVfXIverdXB0ANrQA=
> =c8iU
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3094 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2013-06-10  8:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-06-10  4:09 [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: Vote on the blocksize limit with proof-of-stake voting John Dillon
     [not found] ` <CAFBxzACPpLd1gmoAzxviU2rLPry=cGNQhEZvYV=q_PLRQQ5wXw@mail.gmail.com>
2013-06-10  4:59   ` John Dillon
2013-06-10  5:30 ` Peter Todd
2013-06-10  6:34   ` Daniel Lidstrom
2013-06-10  8:14 ` Melvin Carvalho
2013-06-10  8:26   ` John Dillon
2013-06-10  8:39     ` Melvin Carvalho [this message]
2013-06-10  8:35   ` Pieter Wuille
2013-06-10 12:30     ` Melvin Carvalho
2013-06-10 16:46 ` Mark Friedenbach
2013-06-10 17:25   ` Alan Reiner
2013-06-10 17:43     ` Peter Todd
2013-06-15 18:28       ` John Dillon
2013-06-22 12:05 ` Melvin Carvalho
2013-06-28 10:25   ` John Dillon

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='CAKaEYhJd==3qL3G326xo---Cw+i8X256ZyOppCumnLKYkqy-jg@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=melvincarvalho@gmail.com \
    --cc=bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=john.dillon892@googlemail.com \
    /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