On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 4:59 AM, Jorge Timón
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org wrote:
Also I don't think hitting the limit must be necessarily harmful and
if it is, I don't understand why hitting it at 1MB will be more
harmful than hitting it at 2MB, 8MB or 8GB.
I don't think merely
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 4 August 2015 11:12:36 PM AEST, Gavin Andresen via bitcoin-dev
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 7:27 AM, Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org wrote:
I would say that things
Very interesting paper. When you talk about a market, what are you
referring to exactly? A market means that demand and supply are matched
continuously, and Bitcoin has no such mechanism. A lot of discussion has
been around fixing the supply of blocksize. A floating number would mean
that a
On 5 August 2015 at 09:33, Benjamin via bitcoin-dev
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org wrote:
A market means that demand and supply are matched continuously, and
Bitcoin has no such mechanism.
Not all markets need to have highly liquid trading outlets in order to be
thought of as such.
On 5 August 2015 at 11:18, Hector Chu via bitcoin-dev
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org wrote:
Miners would be uniquely placed to know how best to vary the block size to
maximize their
profit resulting from these two prices. [...]
In that respect a dynamic block size voted on by miners
Thank you for the feedback, Benjamin.
When you talk about a market, what are you referring to exactly?
I define what I mean by healthy, unhealthy, and non-existent markets in Section
7, and I show a figure to illustrate the supply and demand curves in each of
these three cases. A healthy
On 5 August 2015 at 10:57, Adam Back a...@cypherspace.org wrote:
You may find the flexcap idea summarised in outline by Greg Maxwell
and Mark Friedenbach a month or so back interesting in showing that
one can achieve such effects without handing over a free vote to
miners and hence avoid many
On 5 August 2015 at 12:51, Hector Chu hector...@gmail.com wrote:
The market I am thinking of would be open to all, not just miners. But
miners would probably be best placed to profit from such a market, as it is
their business to know about the revenue/costs tradeoff.
This prediction market in
On 5 August 2015 at 12:07, Adam Back a...@cypherspace.org wrote:
This prediction market in block-size seems like something extremely
complex to operate and keep secure in a decentralised fashion.
Why would it need to be decentralised? Bitcoin.org could run the exchange,
and the profits from
CORRECTION: That's Paul Sztorc. Not Peter. Apologies for my abysmal
proofreading.
--
MC
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 8:08 PM -0700, Eric Lombrozo via bitcoin-dev
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org wrote:
Rather than speculating on fake markets, why don’t we use theory, empirical
To put some flesh on the bones of this idea, imagine a hypothetical
security named BLK. Demand for bigger blocks should buy up BLK and demand
for smaller blocks should short BLK. The price of BLK in BTC is the ideal
block size.
Now imagine that there are futures contracts for the security BLK. On
Hello all.
We’d like to share an idea we have to dramatically increase the bitcoin
block propagation speed after a new block has been mined for the first time.
Efficient bitcoin block propagation
A proposed solution to provide near-instantaneous block propagation on the
bitcoin network, even
I'm not sure how bip102 is less secure than other blocksize proposal
but please let's keep defects specific to each proposal in their own
threads.
In any case, I understand that you agree that 95% confirmation is a
good idea for uncontroversial hardforks (like in uncontroversial
softforks).
I'm
Thanks for the reply. My understanding is that the bitcoin relay network is
a backbone of connected high speed servers to increase the rate at which
transactions and new blocks propagate - and remove a number of delays in
processing. But it would still require the miners to download the entire
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Arnoud Kouwenhoven - Pukaki Corp via
bitcoin-dev bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org wrote:
Thanks for the reply. My understanding is that the bitcoin relay network is
a backbone of connected high speed servers to increase the rate at which
transactions and new
Thanks for this (direct) feedback. It would make sense that if blocks can
be submitted using ~5kb packets, that no further optimizations would be
needed at this point. I will look into the relay network transmission
protocol to understand how it works!
I hear that you are saying that this network
Hi Dave,
Thank you for the feedback regarding my paper.
The paper is nicely done, but I'm concerned that there's a real problem with
equation 4. The orphan rate is not just a function of time; it's also a
function of the block maker's proportion of the network hash rate.
Fundamentally a
On 8/5/2015 4:24 PM, Jorge Timón via bitcoin-dev wrote:
Miner A is able to process 100 M tx/block while miner B is only able
to process 10 M tx/block.
B needs to sell ASICs and buy 90 M tx worth of CPU.
Or, if you cap blocksize at 10 M tx, than A needs to sell the exact same
amount of CPU
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 1:51 AM, Gavin Andresen gavinandre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Jorge Timón
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org wrote:
Miner A is able to process 100 M tx/block while miner B is only able
to process 10 M tx/block.
Will miner B be able to
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Elliot Olds elliot.o...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 4:59 AM, Jorge Timón
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org wrote:
Also I don't think hitting the limit must be necessarily harmful and
if it is, I don't understand why hitting it at 1MB will be
On 8/5/2015 3:44 PM, Dave Hudson via bitcoin-dev wrote:
I do suspect that if we were to model this more accurately we might be
able to infer the typical propagation characteristics by measuring
the deviation from the expected distribution.
The paper models propagation using a single time
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Jorge Timón
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org wrote:
Miner A is able to process 100 M tx/block while miner B is only able
to process 10 M tx/block.
Will miner B be able to maintain itself competitive against miner B?
The answer is: it depends on the
On 5 Aug 2015, at 15:15, Peter R pete...@gmx.com wrote:
Hi Dave,
Thank you for the feedback regarding my paper.
The paper is nicely done, but I'm concerned that there's a real problem with
equation 4. The orphan rate is not just a function of time; it's also a
function of the
23 matches
Mail list logo
