From: Tao Effect <contact@taoeffect•com>
To: Chris Priest <cp368202@ohiou•edu>
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] On Hardforks in the Context of SegWit
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 18:45:47 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0034586B-0885-415D-9423-95B888B01106@taoeffect.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAcC9yuJY3Lsd7Z0rx8TFLNT1fJLhrpxzKJREQ7FmdNNjdXJow@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3269 bytes --]
Look, if we’re going to declare something an emergency, we cannot on the one hand say things like: "I strongly believe bitcoin has no place in the world if the fee raise much higher than a few cents per typically-sized transaction”, and on the other declare that there is an emergency worth redefining what *Bitcoin is* because the average txn fee is on the order of 7 cents [1] and has remained reasonable for some time [2].
If you’d like to understand what a qualifying emergency looks like, read the links:
> http://bitledger.info/why-a-hard-fork-should-be-fought-and-its-not-evil-to-discuss/
>
> And here:
>
> http://bitledger.info/hard-fork-risks-and-why-95-should-be-the-standard/
In terms of scaling, we are nowhere close to an emergency.
Scaling is priority #4, maybe, and it’s being taken care of.
Meanwhile, we should be directing our attention one the more pressing and serious concerns like mining centralization & privacy.
Mining centralization is a serious issue. It is *not cool* that 4 dudes (and 1 government) have the power to redefine what Bitcoin is *right now*.
Relevant post with suggestions for fixing that:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/44kwf0/the_hardfork_that_bitcoin_really_needs_not/czrh3na
As far as I can tell, P2Pool & GBT are not the same thing, but I’ve been told that P2Pool might use GBT in some way, even though it’s listed on the wiki as not using it. [3]
A hard fork would ideally enforce decentralized mining pools somehow so that transaction selection is done at the edges instead of the center.
Cheers,
Greg
[1] http://www.cointape.com/
[2] https://blockchain.info/charts/transaction-fees
[3] https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Comparison_of_mining_pools
> On Feb 8, 2016, at 4:54 PM, Chris Priest <cp368202@ohiou•edu> wrote:
>
>> Also, if you’re going to do a hard fork, you’d better make the most of it as hard forks must be a *rare* world-is-ending-if-we-don’t-do-it thing
>
> In my opinion, the network publishing more than 1MB worth of
> transactions while the limit is still 1MB *is* an emergency worthy of
> a hard fork.
>
> If that's not an emergency, then what is?
>
> I strongly believe bitcoin has no place in the world if the fee raise
> much higher than a few cents per typically-sized transaction.
>
> On 2/8/16, Tao Effect via bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> Hard forks should always come in response to some major crisis that all
>> participants can agree is an actual crisis, as per the excellent rational
>> here:
>>
>> http://bitledger.info/why-a-hard-fork-should-be-fought-and-its-not-evil-to-discuss/
>>
>> And here:
>>
>> http://bitledger.info/hard-fork-risks-and-why-95-should-be-the-standard/
>>
>> Also, if you’re going to do a hard fork, you’d better make the most of it as
>> hard forks must be a *rare* world-is-ending-if-we-don’t-do-it thing
>> (otherwise Bitcoin cannot be considered decentralized in any sense of the
>> word).
>>
>> So for any sort of hard fork, be sure to address the real threats and
>> challenges that are facing Bitcoin today:
>>
>> 1. Mining centralization.
>> 2. Privacy.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Greg Slepak
>>
[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 841 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-09 2:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-08 19:26 Matt Corallo
2016-02-08 20:37 ` jl2012
2016-02-08 22:24 ` Tao Effect
[not found] ` <CAAcC9yuJY3Lsd7Z0rx8TFLNT1fJLhrpxzKJREQ7FmdNNjdXJow@mail.gmail.com>
2016-02-09 2:45 ` Tao Effect [this message]
2016-02-08 22:36 ` Simon Liu
2016-02-08 22:54 ` Peter Todd
2016-02-09 9:00 ` Anthony Towns
2016-02-09 21:54 ` Matt Corallo
2016-02-09 22:00 ` Matt Corallo
2016-02-09 22:10 ` Luke Dashjr
2016-02-09 22:39 ` Matt Corallo
2016-02-10 5:16 ` Anthony Towns
2016-02-09 12:32 Nicolas Dorier
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=0034586B-0885-415D-9423-95B888B01106@taoeffect.com \
--to=contact@taoeffect$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=cp368202@ohiou$(echo .)edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
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