-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/08/2015 01:10 PM, Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev wrote:
On Friday 7. August 2015 23.53.43 Adam Back wrote:
On 7 August 2015 at 22:35, Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev
As we concluded in our previous email, the need to run a node
is inversely
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Raystonn, I'm aware that you're addressing your question to Greg
Maxwell, however a point you keep stating as fact calls for reference:
On 07/30/2015 04:28 AM, Raystonn . via bitcoin-dev wrote:
[snip]
How do you plan to address the bleeding of value
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
+1 on every point, sipa
On 08/02/2015 05:32 PM, Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev wrote:
2. Starting date: 30 days after 75% miner support, but not
before 2016-01-12 00:00 UTC
Rationale: A 30-day grace period is given to make sure
everyone has
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/04/2015 08:28 PM, Hector Chu via bitcoin-dev wrote:
On 4 August 2015 at 14:13, Jorge Timón jti...@jtimon.cc
mailto:jti...@jtimon.cc wrote:
2) It doesn't matter who is to blame about the current
centralization: the fact remains that the
following technological growth
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2015 21:30:40 +0700
From: Venzen Khaosan via bitcoin-dev
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Reply-To: ven...@mail.bihthai.net
Organization: Bihthai Bai Mai
To: Gavin Andresen gavinandre...@gmail.com, Bitcoin Dev
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/04/2015 08:12 PM, Gavin Andresen via bitcoin-dev wrote:
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 7:27 AM, Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org wrote:
I would say that things
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/04/2015 06:34 PM, Hector Chu via bitcoin-dev wrote:
Things apparently aren't bad enough to prevent the majority from
clamoring for larger blocks.
If the majority agreed that things had got worse till this point,
and that this was to be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/31/2015 09:58 PM, Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev wrote:
How more users or more nodes can bring more miners, or more
importantly, improve mining decentralization?
Because the bigger the ecosystem is the more interest there is in
taking
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mike Hearn, I might be a nobody to you, but you know i talk with
skill, so let me tell this Friday...
On 07/31/2015 05:16 PM, Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev wrote:
I agree with Gavin
You would, of course.
Bitcoin can support a large scale and it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Geir,
In the scenario below, you argue that the current 1MB limit would lead
to constantly full blocks. If the limit is increased to say 1.6GB
then a government or banking group may choose to utilize 1.5GB of the
capacity of each block (and pay fees
-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
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/12/2015 10:35 AM, Elliot Olds via bitcoin-dev wrote:
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 11:35
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Warren,
I submitted a public apology for a false accusation I leveled at
Sergio Lerner but my message was bounced by the list.
Can you please confirm if there is a know reason for this.
I had also sent the message to his personal email account,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Exactly,
In the coming fee market crunch, any speculator would trade an
extended block in the implied direction and also hedge in the opposite
direction in case it gets rejected.
The speculative public will most likely trade in the same direction,
___ From:
> bitcoin-dev-boun...@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> <bitcoin-dev-boun...@lists.linuxfoundation.org> on behalf of
> Venzen Khaosan via bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> Sent: 07 October 2015 11:19
> To: Mike Hearn; Bitcoin Dev Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Pub
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mike Hearn,
I challenge you to a public debate with the following conditions:
- - the topic is Bitcoin
- - 15 minutes in length (19mins including breaks)
- - 3 sessions of 5 minutes each
- - each speaker makes one statement in each session, not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tell you what, eloquent guy...
Give me 15 minutes in a public open mic session with you and i'll
remove you from your high horse and close your voice in Bitcoin, for
good.
Guaranteed. You're too stupid for me to let you run loose with client
funds
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sergio Demain,
You and I have had our altercation, in private, about your assumptions
of authority in this community. That was fine when you told me "for
fuck's sake" on IRC. I'm a man and I made you see your error and
apologize for your trespass.
18 matches
Mail list logo
