From: "Jorge Timón" <jtimon@jtimon•cc>
To: Jim Phillips <jim@ergophobia•org>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] A reason we can all agree on to increase block size
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2015 12:53:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABm2gDpDJyCdM_ivRccueAUvfqHdds+y7+iGRaTRaR4AC6iQZw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANe1mWzm2+qRh43bxdbE-VAbQKRJFiD5ss7wZV6x+FGCGV+FCA@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 8:53 AM, Jim Phillips via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> Yes I've had a couple other people point that out to me as well and the logic is sound. Unfortunately that doesn't help solve the actual issue that mining is currently consolidated within the jurisdiction of a single political body that is not exactly Bitcoin friendly. I don't know how to solve that issue aside from pointing it out and hoping miners outside of China point to different pools and build more farms in smaller countries. Venezuela for example has cheap electricity and could be a good place to mine. Iceland too.
It's interesting how realizing that the blocksize consensus limit does
the opposite of what you initially thought when starting the thread
didn't changed your conclusion from
"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."
to
"If you're truly worried about larger blocks causing centralization,
think about how, by INCREASING blocksize, you're enabling the
Communist Chinese government to POTENTIALLY INCREASE ITS centralized
control over 57% of the Bitcoin hashing power."
The new conclusion is just "somebody should mine from Venezuela and
Iceland" instead.
If you were so concerned about mining centralization, now that you
understand how the blocksize maximum influences it (by being the only
consensus rule that limits it) and if you were consequent, now you
would warn about the dangers of increasing the blocksize consensus
limit in this particular moment in time when mining centralization
looks already really bad (ie 57% hashrate in the same jurisdiction).
Another possibility is that you don't really care about mining
centralization and you were only looking for an argument in favor of
increasing the blocksize, which for some other reason you have already
concluded that must be done as soon as possible.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-04 10:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-02 21:02 Jim Phillips
2015-08-03 1:21 ` Pindar Wong
2015-08-03 4:33 ` Jim Phillips
2015-08-03 3:13 ` odinn
2015-08-03 6:34 ` Adam Back
2015-08-03 6:53 ` Jim Phillips
2015-08-04 10:53 ` Jorge Timón [this message]
2015-08-03 7:16 ` Simon Liu
2015-08-03 7:34 ` Hector Chu
2015-08-03 7:53 ` Adam Back
2015-08-03 8:06 ` Hector Chu
2015-08-03 8:20 ` Eric Lombrozo
2015-08-03 8:31 ` Hector Chu
2015-08-03 8:38 ` Eric Lombrozo
2015-08-03 8:52 ` Hector Chu
2015-08-03 9:01 ` Eric Lombrozo
2015-08-03 9:22 ` Hector Chu
2015-08-03 7:46 ` Adam Back
2015-08-03 13:57 ` Michael Ruddy
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=CABm2gDpDJyCdM_ivRccueAUvfqHdds+y7+iGRaTRaR4AC6iQZw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=jtimon@jtimon$(echo .)cc \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jim@ergophobia$(echo .)org \
/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