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 1FFC197 for ; Mon, 3 Aug 2015 01:21:29 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-lb0-f177.google.com (mail-lb0-f177.google.com [209.85.217.177]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E0155E8 for ; Mon, 3 Aug 2015 01:21:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: by lblf12 with SMTP id f12so70186253lbl.2 for ; Sun, 02 Aug 2015 18:21:26 -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=xhdeHVpW9TEi9H9C2q4EiSEahJ93FtOhSB1VYUztgII=; b=qfVDu3izpDVw1xNVdAibSE+Zom8GKro+H8+fm9g6prRWVAFyA1V7dJFzHHEiEziEvv O9XWx2ZrhdY1b+3iLWqzqOjsIIUSkRDNBsnhqQ9AT55d/XcdxzkqVxhELpVzpPosq2yW UudeSsjI+DhMrBf8/QdGCHzOQLhgsZ1x5XxGY0+faNbAgNSfLzQJGGdoSMbTYOfHB0jB Q6XGZNqaNhPbWdEwno4G1JSCcCBKyawFmzBe798iA2hKRNxPVQQ3zxy2fTlkhE/13SRn 4BP9SRr40bH6CEuVCu6nmc3BPbgs/I8Bfr2OJTnns3cA4ws9EiRvcinqn4wZVqd5RSsQ ZNbA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.168.102 with SMTP id zv6mr14456665lbb.45.1438564885864; Sun, 02 Aug 2015 18:21:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.152.133.84 with HTTP; Sun, 2 Aug 2015 18:21:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2015 08:21:25 +0700 Message-ID: From: Pindar Wong To: Jim Phillips Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c33d3202296c051c5dfd50 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, T_REMOTE_IMAGE 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] A reason we can all agree on to increase block size 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: Mon, 03 Aug 2015 01:21:29 -0000 --001a11c33d3202296c051c5dfd50 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Dear Jim, Thank you for sharing your view w.r.t. the so called 'Chinese Miners'. Diversity of opinion, and mining, are IMHO both good and it's indeed a free world.... so others who wish to mine bitcoin should be encouraged to make the capital and technical investments to do so. May I ask what is your technical suggestion to move this discussion forward beyond your anti-Chinese/anti-China rhetoric? e.g. I would be particularly grateful if you could share your views w.r.t. colluding miner attacks in draft 0.5.9. of Joseph Poon and Thaddeus Dryja's 'Lightning network' paper, found here:- http://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf Respectfully, p. On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 4:02 AM, Jim Phillips via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > China is a communist country. It is no secret that all "capitalist" > enterprises are essentially State controlled, or at the very least are > subject to nationalization should the State deem it necessary. Most ASIC > chips are manufactured in China, so they are cheap and accessible to > Chinese miners. Electricity is subsidized and essentially free. Cooling is > not an issue since large parts of China are mountainous and naturally cool. > In short the Chinese miners have HUGE advantages over all other mining > operations. This is probably why, between just the top 4 Chinese miners, > the People's Republic of China effectively controls 57% of all the Bitcoin > being mined. > > The ONLY disadvantage the Chinese miners have in competing with the rest > of the world is bandwidth. China has poor connectivity with the rest of the > world, and Chinese miners have said that an increase in the block size > would be detrimental to them. I say, GOOD! Most of the free world has > enough bandwidth to be able to handle larger blocks. We need to take > advantage of that fact to get mining out of the centralized control of the > Chinese. > > If you're truly worried about larger blocks causing centralization, think > about how, by restricting blocksize, you're enabling the Communist Chinese > government to maintain centralized control over 57% of the Bitcoin hashing > power. > > -- > *James G. Phillips IV* > > > > *"Don't bunt. Aim out of the ball park. Aim for the company of immortals." > -- David Ogilvy* > > *This message was created with 100% recycled electrons. Please think > twice before printing.* > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > > --001a11c33d3202296c051c5dfd50 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear Jim,

Thank you for sharing you= r view w.r.t. the so called 'Chinese Miners'.=C2=A0

Diversi= ty of opinion, and mining, are IMHO both good and it's indeed a=C2=A0 f= ree world.... so others who wish to mine bitcoin should be encouraged=C2=A0= to make the capital and technical investments to do so.

May I ask = what is your technical suggestion to move this discussion forward beyond yo= ur anti-Chinese/anti-China rhetoric?=C2=A0=C2=A0 e.g. I would be particular= ly grateful if you could share your=C2=A0 views w.r.t. colluding miner atta= cks in draft 0.5.9. of Joseph Poon and Thaddeus Dryja's 'Lightning = network' paper, found here:-

http://lightning.network/lightning-network-pa= per.pdf

Respectfully,

p.



On M= on, Aug 3, 2015 at 4:02 AM, Jim Phillips via bitcoin-dev = <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
China is a communist country. = It is no secret that all "capitalist" enterprises are essentially= State controlled, or at the very least are subject to nationalization shou= ld the State deem it necessary. Most ASIC chips are manufactured in China, = so they are cheap and accessible to Chinese miners. Electricity is subsidiz= ed and essentially free. Cooling is not an issue since large parts of China= are mountainous and naturally cool. In short the Chinese miners have HUGE = advantages over all other mining operations. This is probably why, between = just the top 4 Chinese miners, the People's Republic of China effective= ly controls 57% of all the Bitcoin being mined.

Th= e ONLY disadvantage the Chinese miners have in competing with the rest of t= he world is bandwidth. China has poor connectivity with the rest of the wor= ld, and Chinese miners have said that an increase in the block size would b= e detrimental to them. I say, GOOD! Most of the free world has enough bandw= idth to be able to handle larger blocks. We need to take advantage of that = fact to get mining out of the centralized control of the Chinese.

If you're truly worried about larger blocks causing cen= tralization, think about how, by restricting blocksize, you're enabling= the Communist Chinese government to maintain centralized control over 57% = of the Bitcoin hashing power.

--
= James G. Phillips IV=C2=A0=C2=A0<= /div>
"Don't bunt. Aim out of the ba= ll park. Aim for the company of immortals." -- David Ogilvy

=C2=A0This message was created with 100% recy= cled electrons. Please think twice before printing.
=

_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.= linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail= man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev


--001a11c33d3202296c051c5dfd50--