On 8/30/2015 9:54 AM, Peter R wrote:
> Like Daniele pointed out, the greedy algorithm assumed in the paper is
> asymptotically optimal in such a case.
I'm convinced.
___
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxf
Hello Tom, Daniele --
Thank you Tom for pointing out the knapsack problem to all of us. I will
include a note about it when I make the other corrections to the Fee Market
paper.
I agree with what Daniele said previously. The other "non-greedy" solutions to
the knapsack problem are most relev
29, 2015 at 10:21 PM
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Unlimited Max Blocksize (reprise)
To: Daniele Pinna
Daniele --
Thanks! I printed it and read the whole thing. It's really a great step
forward building on the Peter R paper. The conclusions are enticing. I'm
looking forward to under
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 12:22 AM, Daniele Pinna via bitcoin-dev
wrote:
> I don't get how it's very risky to have the Mike and Gavin redirect the
> course of the bitcoin protocol but it's totally fine to consider complex
> miner voting protocols as a hard fork option.
Maybe this helps undesrtandin
I don't get how it's very risky to have the Mike and Gavin redirect the
course of the bitcoin protocol but it's totally fine to consider complex
miner voting protocols as a hard fork option.
I believe that this community has not given due weight to the analysis
proposed by Peter__R on the existenc
