From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1YzPKs-0008Or-AZ for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 01 Jun 2015 13:00:58 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from mout.perfora.net ([74.208.4.196]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) id 1YzPKq-0007kg-F9 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 01 Jun 2015 13:00:58 +0000 Received: from mail-qc0-f179.google.com ([209.85.216.179]) by mrelay.perfora.net (mreueus003) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MNb1I-1Z29A82X6o-007DI8 for ; Mon, 01 Jun 2015 15:00:50 +0200 Received: by qcej9 with SMTP id j9so3916216qce.1 for ; Mon, 01 Jun 2015 06:00:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.55.22.130 with SMTP id 2mr38724680qkw.45.1433163649794; Mon, 01 Jun 2015 06:00:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.96.112.164 with HTTP; Mon, 1 Jun 2015 06:00:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2015 14:00:49 +0100 Message-ID: From: Adam Back To: =?UTF-8?B?SsOpcsO0bWUgTGVnb3VwaWw=?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:1vSkIWBAqFqTbedxpPspC2F8WaXQYMv7x7wkR3jSy8n99tp5cRM iepghifU0+G8fjkCcJ4h+iIkTaNtgQ2MTL45r0zNLW+1+TQCeLcnupwVqfW5wi2WBWsDOxK 3JZTTS+PVTMY1FoC5YE19p3I1HODBFUcdEe6t2yYc9y0ZWMgYyBw39oUwunnts+mpF5ViAI pJceYPmbiRQba+zU7XtZw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [74.208.4.196 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record X-Headers-End: 1YzPKq-0007kg-F9 Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposed alternatives to the 20MB step 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: Mon, 01 Jun 2015 13:00:58 -0000 Agree with everything you said. Spot on observations on all counts. Thank you for speaking up. Adam On 1 June 2015 at 13:45, J=C3=A9r=C3=B4me Legoupil w= rote: >>What do other people think? >> >> >>If we can't come to an agreement soon, then I'll ask for help >>reviewing/submitting patches to Mike's Bitcoin-Xt project that implement = a >>big increase now that grows over time so we may never have to go through >>all this rancor and debate again." >> >> >>I'll then ask for help lobbying the merchant services and exchanges and >>hosted wallet companies and other bitcoind-using-infrastructure companies > > > It's surprising to see a core dev going to the public to defend a proposa= l > most other core devs disagree on, and then lobbying the Bitcoin ecosystem= . > > This is an very unhealthy way to go because it incentives the other core > devs to stop their technical work and go public and lobby too (cf G.Maxwe= ll > trying to raise redditters awareness). > > We need core devs to work on technical issues, not waste time doing > politics, but Gavin's confrontational approach doesn't give them much of = a > choice. > > I fear that because of this approach, in the next monthes, core devs with= be > lobbying and doing politics : precious time will be wasted for everyone > having stake in Bitcoin. > > > Regarding the 20MB proposal content: > > Decentralization is the core of Bitcoin's security model and thus that's > what gives Bitcoin its value. > > The danger is that decentralization tends naturally towards centralizatio= n, > because centralization is more efficient. Going from decentralization to > centralization is easy, going the other way is a lot harder : > decentralization we lose, may never be gained back. > > Regarding "the urgency to do something": > > I believe it would be extremely healthy for the network to bump into any > limit ASAP ... (let it be 1MB) : to incentive layer 2 and offchain soluti= ons > to scale Bitcoin : there are promising designs/solutions out there (LN, > ChainDB, OtherCoin protocole, ...), but most don't get much attention, > because there is right now no need for them. And, I am sure new solutions > will be invented. > > If during the "1MB bumpy period" something goes wrong, consensus among th= e > community would be reached easily if necessary. > > Pretending there is urgency and that Apocalypse is approaching is a falla= cy. > > The Gavin 20MB proposal is compromising Bitcoin's long-term security in a= n > irreversible way, for gaining short-term better user experience. > > I oppose the Gavin proposal in both content and form. > > Cheers, > Jerome > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- > > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development >