-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Your concern for adoption is valid yet there are a few assumptions in
your discussion and they are a common thread in the current wave of
bigger blocksize topics.
1) Supplying bigger blocks will meet the demand of more people:
Anyone can transact
On Tuesday 11. August 2015 21.27.46 Jorge Timón wrote:
Can we agree that the first step in any potentially bad situation is
hitting the limit and then fees rising as a consequence?
Fees rising due to scarcity has nothing to do with the problem. Its a
consequence that is irrelevant to me.
Bad
On Tuesday 11. August 2015 19.47.56 Jorge Timón wrote:
On Aug 11, 2015 12:14 AM, Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev
See my various emails in the last hour.
I've read them. I have read gavin's blog posts as well, several times.
I still don't see what else can we fear from not increasing the size
I believe all concerns I've read can be classified in the following groups:
1) Potential indirect consequence of rising fees.
- Lowest fee transactions (currently free transactions) will become
more unreliable.
- People will migrate to competing systems (PoW altcoins) with lower fees.
2)
On Wednesday 12. August 2015 10.51.57 Jorge Timón wrote:
Personally I think its a bad idea to do write the way you do, which is
that
some people have to prove that bad things will happen if we don't make a
certain change. It polarizes the discussion and puts people into camps.
Peoplehave
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Wednesday 12. August 2015 10.51.57 Jorge Timón wrote:
Personally I think its a bad idea to do write the way you do, which is
that
some people have to prove that bad things will
On Wednesday 12. August 2015 11.45.53 Jorge Timón wrote:
This question had been dodged repeatedly (one more time in this last
response).
This last response had a very direct answer to your question, why do you
think it was dodged?
I wrote; To buy more time, get bigger blocks now. (quoted from
On Wednesday 12. August 2015 12.28.39 Jorge Timón wrote:
But let's just list the concerns first.
Concerns?
I have never heard of develop-by-concerns? Is that similar to
fire fighting management?
To that I have this reply;
http://www.aleanjourney.com/2009/07/stop-fighting-fires.html
Your
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Assuming some form of BIP 100 is a path which people may want to take,
how and at what point do miners vote on this?
Note:
https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/37943/bip-100-what-votes-are
- -possible
describes this somewhat, but is unclear as
I have never heard of develop-by-concerns? Is that similar to
fire fighting management?
To that I have this reply;
http://www.aleanjourney.com/2009/07/stop-fighting-fires.html
A set of goals is needed and then you develop road maps. At that point
you can propose specific changes that fit
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 2:59 AM, Jorge Timón
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org wrote:
I believe all concerns I've read can be classified in the following groups:
1) Potential indirect consequence of rising fees.
I'd rephrase this as Consequences of high fees. It's the level of fees
11 matches
Mail list logo
