On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 08:45:00AM -0400, Gavin Andresen wrote: > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 8:28 AM, Peter Todd wrote: > > > Bitcoin doesn't scale. There's a lot of issues at hand here, but the > > most fundemental of them is that to create a block you need to update > > the state of the UTXO set, and the way Bitcoin is designed means that > > updating that state requires bandwidth equal to all the transaction > > volume to keep up with the changes to what set. Long story short, we get > > O(n^2) scaling, which is just plain infeasible. > > > > We have a fundamental disagreement here. > > If you go back and read Satoshi's original thoughts on scaling, it is clear > that he imagined tens of thousands of mining nodes and hundreds of millions > of lightweight SPV users. Yeah, about that... https://blockchain.info/pools For someone with 'Chief Scientist' as their job title, I'm surprised you think so little of hard evidence and so much of idol worshipping. P.S. A year or so ago you complained that if I cared so much about decentralization, I should make P2Pool better. Your homework: What do tree-chains and Andrew Miller's non-outsourcable puzzles(1) have to do with that? What about the cube-square law? And why don't I think TXO commitments solve the blocksize problem? 1) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=309073.0;all -- 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org 000000000000000020366a15799010ae0432be831c197e06b19133028a9aa6f3