On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 12:19 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote:
> Gavin, could you please provide some clarity around the definition and
> meaning of "key-holder [decentralization]"? Is this about the absolute
> number of key-holders? or rather about the number of transactions (per unit
> time?) that key-ho
On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Gavin Andresen via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> I'm very disappointed you don't mention the tradeoff at "the other end of
> the bathtub" -- Key-holder versus Validator decentralization balance
Gavin, could you please provide some c
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Adam Back via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Some thoughts, hope this is not off-topic.
>
> Maybe we should summarise the security assumptions and design
> requirements. It is often easier to have clear design discussions by
> first
On 11/06/2015 03:41 PM, Chris Priest wrote:
>> The bigger point however, which Erik explained, was: widespread use of
>> APIs as a sole means of interfacing with the blockchain also
>> contributes to reducing network security for everyone, because it
>> erodes the consensus rule validation security
> The bigger point however, which Erik explained, was: widespread use of
> APIs as a sole means of interfacing with the blockchain also
> contributes to reducing network security for everyone, because it
> erodes the consensus rule validation security described under
> "Validators" in the OP.
I co
You're right that it is better that there be more APIs than fewer,
that is less of a single point of failure. It also depends what you
mean by APIs: using an API to have a second cross-check of information
is quite different to building a wallet or business that only
interfaces with the blockchain
On 11/5/15, Eric Voskuil via bitcoin-dev
wrote:
> On 11/05/2015 03:03 PM, Adam Back via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>> ...
>> Validators: Economically dependent full nodes are an important part of
>> Bitcoin's security model because they assure Bitcoin security by
>> enforcing consensus rules. While full
I'd also like to see some more formal analysis of the notion that "$10 in
the hand of 10 people is more than $50 in the hand of two, or $100 in the
hand of one". I think this encapsulates the security assumption on why we
want decentralization at all.
This is a very critical property bitcoin explo
On 11/05/2015 03:03 PM, Adam Back via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> ...
> Validators: Economically dependent full nodes are an important part of
> Bitcoin's security model because they assure Bitcoin security by
> enforcing consensus rules. While full nodes do not have orphan
> risk, we also dont want mali
Some thoughts, hope this is not off-topic.
Maybe we should summarise the security assumptions and design
requirements. It is often easier to have clear design discussions by
first articulating assumptions and requirements.
Validators: Economically dependent full nodes are an important part of
Bi
10 matches
Mail list logo
