Be advised that starting this week bitcoin-dev, lightning-dev and other
Bitcoin-oriented lists currently still active at
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo will begin migration to
the Linux Foundation's new list infrastructure operated by groups.io. You
may continue to use these lis
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 2:12 AM, Luzius Meisser
wrote:
> I agree that flex cap is promising. However, for it to be a viable
> long-term solution, it must not depend on significant block subsidies
> to work as the block subsidy will become less and less relevant over
> time
There is another vari
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 9:42 AM, Luzius Meisser via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> This post serves to convince you of the economic benefits of smoothing
> the payout of fees across blocks. It incentivizes decentralization and
> supports the establishment of a fee ma
Does it really change the schedule when the next difficulty retarget
readjusts to an average of 10 minutes again?
On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 8:27 PM, Tom Harding via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> There is another concern regarding "flexcap" that was not discussed.
>
I am skeptical that any license for the blockchain itself is needed because
of the possibility that the blockchain is not entitled to copyright
protection. While I am not a lawyer, I have stared hard at the copyright
doctrine of the U.S. in multiple law school Intellectual Property courses
and dur
Hi folks,
I think we should agree to disable the ability to subscribe with digests on
bitcoin-dev list. I think digests were from an earlier era of Internet
history. Digests are inconvenient for everyone because replies have the
problem of breaking threads.These days people should be setting
FYI, a few developers including Wladimir, Greg, Peter Todd, Pieter, and
Alex Morcos have been discussing what to do about improving the signal
noise ratio on bitcoin-dev list. One proposal similar to this discussion
was to split it into multiple mailing lists. It was pointed out that the
less tec
I honestly don't understand your position, but I get the sense that you are
suggesting Satoshi wouldn't be welcome to return if he wanted to be active
in development again?
Warren
On Aug 17, 2015 1:38 PM, "Oliver Egginger" wrote:
> Am 17.08.2015 um 21:03 schrieb Warren Togami Jr.:
> > This bitco
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 4:40 AM, Oliver Egginger via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> That made it to the news and is now discussed in various places. Could
> you please delete Satoshis old email addresses from the list and block
> them? Sorry to post this to all mem
Dude, while it does appear plausible that the box is insecure, is it truly
warranted to jump to any particular conclusion from that alone?
What if all the open ports is just because it is a honey pot?
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 11:41 AM, Jonathan Wilkins via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfou
10 matches
Mail list logo
