On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Jorge Timón jti...@jtimon.cc wrote:
Whatever...let's use the current subsidies, the same argument applies,
it's just 20 + 25 = 45 btc per block for miner B vs 27 btc for miner B.
Miner B would still go out of business, bigger blocks still mean more
mining and
On May 31, 2015 5:08 PM, Gavin Andresen gavinandre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Jorge Timón jti...@jtimon.cc wrote:
Whatever...let's use the current subsidies, the same argument applies,
it's just 20 + 25 = 45 btc per block for miner B vs 27 btc for miner B.
Miner B
On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 9:31 AM, gb kiw...@yahoo.com wrote:
Aren't you calculating bandwidth for a singly-connected node? A highly
connected miner could have 30-100 node connections so you probably need
to increase your traffic estimates by that factor.
I.e. For 100MB blocks, 30-100 Mbps and
He also said that the equation for miners has many variables, as it
should. There is no disadvantage if the network speed is the same
between the miners. If there is a difference in network speed, the
miner is incentivized to invest in their network infrastructure.
2015-05-31 23:55 GMT+01:00 Alex
2015-06-01 0:40 GMT+01:00 Pindar Wong pindar.w...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:23 AM, Ricardo Filipe ricardojdfil...@gmail.com
wrote:
He also said that the equation for miners has many variables, as it
should. There is no disadvantage if the network speed is the same
between the
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Ricardo Filipe ricardojdfil...@gmail.com
wrote:
2015-06-01 0:40 GMT+01:00 Pindar Wong pindar.w...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:23 AM, Ricardo Filipe
ricardojdfil...@gmail.com
wrote:
He also said that the equation for miners has many variables,
Yes, if you are on a slow network then you are at a (slight) disadvantage.
So?
Chun mentioned that his pool is on a slow network, and thus bigger blocks
give it an disadvantage. (Orphan rate is proportional to block size.)
You said that no, on contrary those who make big blocks have a
On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 3:05 AM, Peter Todd p...@petertodd.org wrote:
Yeah, I'm pretty surprised myself that Gavin never accepted the
compromises offered by others in this space for a slow growth solution
What compromise? I haven't seen a specific proposal that could be turned
into a pull
Aren't you calculating bandwidth for a singly-connected node? A highly
connected miner could have 30-100 node connections so you probably need
to increase your traffic estimates by that factor.
I.e. For 100MB blocks, 30-100 Mbps and $60-$100 per day data costs.
You should be able to handle
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 9:31 PM, Chun Wang 1240...@gmail.com wrote:
If someone propagate a 20MB block, it will take at best 6 seconds for
us to receive to verify it at current configuration, result of one
percent orphan rate increase.
That orphan rate increase will go to whoever is producing
That orphan rate increase will go to whoever is producing the 20MB blocks,
NOT you.
This depends on how miners are connected.
E.g. suppose there are three miners, A and B have fast connectivity between
then, and C has a slow network.
Suppose that A miners a block and B receives it in 1
On 31 May 2015, at 13:52, Gavin Andresen gavinandre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 9:31 PM, Chun Wang 1240...@gmail.com
mailto:1240...@gmail.com wrote:
If someone propagate a 20MB block, it will take at best 6 seconds for
us to receive to verify it at current configuration,
I will abstain on this wrangle of when,
Instead I'd like to address some of the network topology health issues
that's been brought up in this debate.
Due to how blocks are being broadcast by miners at the moment, it is not
difficult to find the origin node of these blocks. These more influential
On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Jorge Timón jti...@jtimon.cc wrote:
Here's a thought experiment:
Subsidy is gone, all the block reward comes from fees.
I wrote about long-term hypotheticals and why I think it is a big mistake
to waste time worrying about them here:
On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 9:45 AM, Alex Mizrahi alex.mizr...@gmail.com
wrote:
That orphan rate increase will go to whoever is producing the 20MB
blocks, NOT you.
This depends on how miners are connected.
E.g. suppose there are three miners, A and B have fast connectivity
between then, and
Whatever...let's use the current subsidies, the same argument applies, it's
just 20 + 25 = 45 btc per block for miner B vs 27 btc for miner B.
Miner B would still go out of business, bigger blocks still mean more
mining and validation centralization. The question is how far I we willing
to go with
16 matches
Mail list logo