Re: [bitcoin-dev] Coins: A trustless sidechain protocol

2020-01-15 Thread Angel Leon via bitcoin-dev
> Instead of using sidechains, just use channel factories. > You do not need to broadcast the entire internal ledgers of those services, only their customers need to know those internal ledgers, and sign off on the updates of those ledgers. That's right, all you need to broadcast is a small

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Small Nodes: A Better Alternative to Pruned Nodes

2017-04-19 Thread Angel Leon via bitcoin-dev
>Financially incentivising nodes is a really weird area because it would allow someone to essentially automate the deployment of nodes. i.e. if a node can pay for itself 100% (even at a lesser value, it just becomes cheaper overall), you could write an application that uses an AWS API or a digital

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Planned Obsolescence

2016-12-15 Thread Angel Leon via bitcoin-dev
Perhaps if there were a message that would nag your stdout or log output letting you know there's a new version available, or N more versions available and that you might be missing out on X security patches, Y protocol improvements, depending on how far back you are, you'd be tempted to upgrade,

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Dynamically Controlled Bitcoin Block Size Max Cap

2015-08-17 Thread Angel Leon via bitcoin-dev
I've been sharing a similar solution for the past 2 weeks. I think 2016 blocks is too much of a wait, I think we should look at the mean block size during the last 60-120 minutes instead and avert any crisis caused by transactional spikes that could well be caused by organic use of the network

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP [104]: Replace Transaction Fees with Data, Discussion Draft 0.2.9

2015-08-17 Thread Angel Leon via bitcoin-dev
so you want us to, (i) at the moment of payment decide wether to pay a tx fee, or to include some data about what the transaction is about... (ii) and (iii) are out of the question as you'd be forcing people to not have privacy, which is one of the main reasons people use bitcoin, just paying like

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP [104]: Replace Transaction Fees with Data, Discussion Draft 0.2.9

2015-08-17 Thread Angel Leon via bitcoin-dev
By increasing the size of blocks, transaction fees may not be available to supplement mining revenue and so those who do not have access to cheap or free power to mine; why? wouldn't a bigger block size actually allow for more transactions per block, therefore more fees to be collected, and the

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Adjusted difficulty depending on relative blocksize

2015-08-14 Thread Angel Leon via bitcoin-dev
Like this? https://gist.github.com/gubatron/143e431ee01158f27db4 http://twitter.com/gubatron On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 5:59 AM, Jakob Rönnbäck bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org wrote: Greetings, a thought occurred to me that I would love to hear what some bitcoin experts think about.

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fees and the block-finding process

2015-08-11 Thread Angel Leon via bitcoin-dev
tell that to people in poor countries, or even in first world countries. The competitive thing here is a deal breaker for a lot of people who have no clue/don't care for decentralization, they just want to send money from A to B, like email. http://twitter.com/gubatron On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fees and the block-finding process

2015-08-11 Thread Angel Leon via bitcoin-dev
- policy neutrality. - It can't be censored. - it can't be shut down - and the rules cannot change from underneath you. except it can be shutdown the minute it actually gets used by its inability to scale. what's the point of having all this if nobody can use it? what's the point of going