Re: [bitcoin-dev] Towards a means of measuring user support for Soft Forks

2022-04-27 Thread Chris Riley via bitcoin-dev
>> we should not let the wealthy make consensus decisions. >We shouldn't let the wealthy continue to control our governments. However, bitcoin is not a government. Its a financial network. >The fact of the matter is that fundamentally, the economic majority controls where the chain goes. Its very

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Stamping transaction

2020-06-09 Thread Chris Riley via bitcoin-dev
Hello, Just a few comments. >But there is no guarantee that ndes should keep all of them from the genesis. It depends. Maybe some nodes want to keep all the transactions, some part of them and might nothing. There is no guarantee that nodes keep them all from the genesis now, nodes can turn on

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Proposal: Revised: UTPFOTIB - Use Transaction Priority For Ordering Transactions In Blocks

2017-12-18 Thread Chris Riley via bitcoin-dev
Regarding "problem" #2 where you say "How do we ensure that all valid transactions are eventually included in the blockchain?": I do not believe that all people would (a) agree this is a problem or (b) that we do want to *ENSURE* that *ALL* valid transactions are eventually included in the

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP - Dead Man's Switch

2017-12-11 Thread Chris Riley via bitcoin-dev
Hi, 1. If there are 16.4 million mined and 4 million are lost, that results in 12.4 million in circulation vs 14.4 million. 2. Satoshi addressed this as have numerous other people ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=198.msg1647#msg1647 ) - lost coins decrease supply, increasing value of the

Re: [bitcoin-dev] UTXO growth scaling solution proposal

2017-08-22 Thread Chris Riley via bitcoin-dev
hat their >> coins requires moving every once in a long while you ensure they won't do >> stupid things or come back 50 years from now and complain their addresses >> have been scavenged. >> >> -- >> Thomas >> >> >> On 22/08/17 10:29 AM, Er

Re: [bitcoin-dev] UTXO growth scaling solution proposal

2017-08-22 Thread Chris Riley via bitcoin-dev
This seems to be drifting off into alt-coin discussion. The idea that we can change the rules and steal coins at a later date because they are "stale" or someone is "hoarding" is antithetical to one of the points of bitcoin in that you can no longer control your own money ("be your own bank")

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Planned Obsolescence

2016-12-18 Thread Chris Riley via bitcoin-dev
I agree that finding the right line is difficult and purposefully crippling (too strong a term?) the software is not necessarily the best way to encourage long term adoption. For example, I ran version 0.3.x from July/August 2010 for several years on a miner without upgrading to anything higher

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Number Request: Addresses over Audio

2016-08-09 Thread Chris Riley via bitcoin-dev
Have you checked AudioModem out: https://github.com/applidium/AudioModem Or Chirp: http://www.chirp.io/faq/ Or this Network World article (particularly the last portion on bitcoin): http://www.networkworld.com/article/2956450/smartphones/sending-data-over-sound-revisited.html and

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Making AsicBoost irrelevant

2016-05-10 Thread Chris Riley via bitcoin-dev
The second like "2)" has a link to the paper: http://www.math.rwth-aachen.de/~Timo.Hanke/AsicBoostWhitepaperrev5.pdf which does discuss the fact that it is "patent-pending". Likewise it discusses ASIC improvements. Avoiding patents that impact bitcoin and are not freely licensed, is something