On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 4:46 PM, Btc Drak via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 12:35 AM, Chris Pacia via bitcoin-dev
> > It may be in everyone's collective interest to raise the block size but
> not
> > their individual interest.
>
> It is clear
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 4:57 PM, Jorge Timón <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> To be clear, these two are just my personal lists of arguments on
> "each side" to clear my mind and try to be perfectly objective.
> [...]
> Here's the updated both-thread lists:
>
>
> http://0bin.net/p
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Jorge Timón wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 9:52 PM, Elliot Olds
> wrote:
>
> -Reduce the utility of people using the network, even if the higher fees
> > don't reduce their amount of transactions.
>
> "Utility" like "value" is always subjective and very vague.
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 9:47 PM, Venzen Khaosan
wrote:
>
> On 08/12/2015 10:35 AM, Elliot Olds via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > It depends on which use case's reliability that you focus on. For
> > any specific use case of Bitcoin, that use case will be more
> > reli
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
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 11:35 PM, Michael Naber
> wrote:
>
>> Bitcoin would be better money than current money even if it were a bit
>> more expensive to transact, simply because of it
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 9:28 AM, Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Gavin Andresen
> wrote:
>
>> I think there are multiple reasons to raise the maximum block size, and
>> yes, fear of Bad Things Happening as we run up ag
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 12:28 PM, Jorge Timón wrote:
> I would just like that there was an attempt to automatically
> estimate those risks before taking those risks.
>
I agree.
> My main point about fees is that minimum mining fees rising above zero
> (theri current level) is not necessarily a
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 6:26 PM, Jorge Timón wrote:
>
>
> Given that for any non-absurdly-big size some transactions will
> eventually be priced out, and that the consensus rule serves for
> limiting mining centralization (and more indirectly centralization in
> general) and not about trying to set
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 4:59 AM, Jorge Timón <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> Also I don't think "hitting the limit" must be necessarily harmful and
> if it is, I don't understand why hitting it at 1MB will be more
> harmful than hitting it at 2MB, 8MB or 8GB.
I don't think mere
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> But it is easier to find common ground with others by compromising. Is 8mb
> better than no limit? I don't know and I don't care much:
>
People seeing statements like this might imagine
11 matches
Mail list logo
