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 2A62288B for ; Mon, 10 Aug 2015 23:11:16 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-ig0-f175.google.com (mail-ig0-f175.google.com [209.85.213.175]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AEBC4FB for ; Mon, 10 Aug 2015 23:11:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by igbpg9 with SMTP id pg9so79935626igb.0 for ; Mon, 10 Aug 2015 16:11:15 -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=RhTnHlhe5T3S11oGZRfV1o27HnM8vhe1A0eLd3QUDf0=; b=nebX8MYoQ+yp9OGX4DenDiF196TA3190vUO1TeeIg53/0cNQYv7URc8fUcN8vy6/dk NlkX9fOxuD05pPDtIwZtN5TsqWqbtuRgN4nqBzJ75WjSESaYDQ/lFcHbfRWcVA7+LDbU tY6hSw8B+YJOfADS/9NIg2uJkMoYEKuMHhK9BYpz8LqKMED8WvEBq/4VQD9bAfXpGBoI LL2BLcD03XvOjYneqN+TCRMEpDJy0dAj7SKNjTcZB0lvz3kKFRT+zhENSlFCodDvSYBd DOLLcj+y6DujPrtL5VK62dJEM4FezNWqUvi0J8Ui9y0Nv0Lp8/nAfW07v3cNEuKgeZdY 6IWA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.243.229 with SMTP id xb5mr3785595igc.0.1439248275155; Mon, 10 Aug 2015 16:11:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.36.77.201 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Aug 2015 16:11:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.36.77.201 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Aug 2015 16:11:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1472719.PaoH0O6gJe@coldstorage> Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 01:11:14 +0200 Message-ID: From: Pieter Wuille To: Thomas Zander Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1134bace2f3e21051cfd1a03 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] Fees and the block-finding process 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, 10 Aug 2015 23:11:16 -0000 --001a1134bace2f3e21051cfd1a03 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Aug 11, 2015 12:52 AM, "Pieter Wuille" wrote: > > > On Aug 11, 2015 12:18 AM, "Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev" < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > > Have you ever been to a concert that was far away from public transport? They > > typically set up bus shuttles, or taxis to get people back into town > > afterwards. > > The result there is always you end up waiting forever and it actually may be > > easier to just walk instead of wait. > > The amount you pay is irrelevant if everyone is paying it. There still is more > > demand than there is capacity. > > That's an incorrect analogy. You choose the rate you pay, and get higher priority when you pay more. Taxi drivers can't pick out higher-paying customers in advance. I'm sorry, I missed your "if everyone is paying it". This changes a lot. I agree with you: if everyone wants to pay much then it becomes unreliable. But I don't think that is something we can avoid with a small constant factor block size increase, and we don't do the world a service by making it look like it works for longer. Let's grow within bounderies set by technology and centralization pressure that we can agree on. Let the market decide whether how they will that will low volume reliable transactions and/or high volume unreliable ones. -- Pieter --001a1134bace2f3e21051cfd1a03 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8

On Aug 11, 2015 12:52 AM, "Pieter Wuille" <pieter.wuille@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 11, 2015 12:18 AM, "Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev" <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> > Have you ever been to a concert that was far away from public transport? They
> > typically set up bus shuttles, or taxis to get people back into town
> > afterwards.
> > The result there is always you end up waiting forever and it actually may be
> > easier to just walk instead of wait.
> > The amount you pay is irrelevant if everyone is paying it. There still is more
> > demand than there is capacity.
>
> That's an incorrect analogy. You choose the rate you pay, and get higher priority when you pay more. Taxi drivers can't pick out higher-paying customers in advance.

I'm sorry, I missed your "if everyone is paying it". This changes a lot. I agree with you: if everyone wants to pay much then it becomes unreliable.

But I don't think that is something we can avoid with a small constant factor block size increase, and we don't do the world a service by making it look like it works for longer.

Let's grow within bounderies set by technology and centralization pressure that we can agree on. Let the market decide whether how they will that will low volume reliable transactions and/or high volume unreliable ones.

--
Pieter

--001a1134bace2f3e21051cfd1a03--