Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase Requirements

Linear growth is indeed the 'simplest' model for growth so removes concerns of complexity using such a growth model. Seems like it might be a safe compromise between exponential growth, zero growth and buys some time to observe the longer term scale network behaviour. A simple linear growth 'hard

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Fwd: Block Size Increase Requirements

Thank you very much Chun Wang for the details below. While I'm based in HK, but I'd like to propose that the miners in China work together with Gavin and others to run an experiment of sorts next month to gather more details for the community. p. On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 9:31 AM, Chun Wang <12

[Bitcoin-development] Fwd: Block Size Increase Requirements

On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 9:57 PM, Gavin Andresen wrote: >> Bad miners could attack us and the network with artificial >> big blocks. > > > How? > > I ran some simulations, and I could not find a network topology where a big > miner producing big blocks could cause a loss of profit to another miner

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase Requirements

> > Stop trying to dictate block growth limits. Block size will be determined > by competition between miners and availability of transactions, not through > hard-coded limits. > Do you even game theory, bro? It doesn't work that way. Mike Hearn described the problem in this article: https://medi

[Bitcoin-development] Proposal: A measured response to save Bitcoin Core

Greg, Pieter, Jeff, and Wladimir, I'll try to be brief to respect your time. 1. I don't want to see Bitcoin die. 2. As has been discussed on this list and elsewhere: Bitcoin could potentially die due to economic and/or game-theoretic complications arising from raising the block size limit, but

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase Requirements

> Why 20 MB? Do you anticipate 20x transaction count growth in 2016? > > Do you anticipate linear growth? > It's safe to say that absolutely nobody can predict the actual growth with any degree of an accuracy. I believe that linear growth compares very favorably to other alternatives: 1. Exponent

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase Requirements

Stop trying to dictate block growth limits.  Block size will be determined by competition between miners and availability of transactions, not through hard-coded limits.  I see now the temporary 1MB limit was a mistake.  It should have gone in as a dynamic limit that scales with average block size.

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase Requirements

> Why 20 MB? Do you anticipate 20x transaction count growth in 2016? Do you anticipate linear growth? > On May 30, 2015, at 6:05 PM, Alex Mizrahi wrote: > > >> Why 2 MB ? > > Why 20 MB? Do you anticipate 20x transaction count growth in 2016? > > Why not grow it by 1 MB per year? > This is

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase Requirements

> Why 2 MB ? > Why 20 MB? Do you anticipate 20x transaction count growth in 2016? Why not grow it by 1 MB per year? This is a safer option, I don't think that anybody claims that 2 MB blocks will be a problem. And in 10 years when we get to 10 MB we'll get more evidence as to whether network can

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase Requirements

On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 3:32 PM, Matt Corallo wrote: > If, for example, the majority of miners are in China (they are), and > there is really poor connectivity in and out of China (there is) and a > miner naively optimizes for profit, they will create blocks which are > large and take a while to

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase Requirements

On 05/29/15 23:48, Gavin Andresen wrote: > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 7:25 PM, Matt Corallo > wrote: > > Sadly, this is very far from the whole story. The issue of miners > optimizing for returns has been discussed several times during this > discussion

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase Requirements

On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 9:57 PM, Gavin Andresen wrote: > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 7:42 PM, Chun Wang <1240...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hello. I am from F2Pool. We are currently mining the biggest blocks on >> the network. > > > Thanks for giving your opinion! > > > >> Bad miners could attack us and

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase Requirements

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 7:42 PM, Chun Wang <1240...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello. I am from F2Pool. We are currently mining the biggest blocks on > the network. Thanks for giving your opinion! > Bad miners could attack us and the network with artificial > big blocks. How? I ran some simulatio

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposed alternatives to the 20MB step function

> or achieving less than great DOS protection Right now a bunch of redditors can DOS the network at the cost of a few thousand dollars per day, shared between them. Since the cost of validating transactions is far lower than current minimum relay fees, then increasing the block size increases the