📅 Original date posted:2015-08-21
📝 Original message:On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 12:23 PM, Milly Bitcoin via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> For the 73th time or so this month on this list:
>>
>> The maximum block size consensus rule limits mining centralization
>> (which is currently pretty bad).
>
>
> Instead of posting all these messages with bald claims why don't you work on
> a decentralization metric which you can point to?
Please start with the centralization metrics we both agree are
necessary instead of keeping insulting me publicly and privately.
> (instead of trying to
> claim people don't understand things which is clearly not the case, You are
> just attacking people you don't agree with).
I'm not inventing this, he recently said so himself publicly on this
mailing list:
"I don't believe that the maximum block size has much at all to do with
mining centralization"
http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/009960.html
It is therefore not surprising that non-developers and developers with
less experience in Bitcoin than Gavin have similar misunderstandings.
That claim seems in contradiction with his earlier analysis:
http://gavinandresen.ninja/are-bigger-blocks-better-for-bigger-miners
"I ran some simulations, and if blocks take 20 seconds to propagate, a
network with a miner that has 30% of the hashing power will get 30.3%
of the blocks."
That's why I was surprised when he denied the relation between the
consensus maximum size and mining centralization, but hey, people
change their minds and that's completely fine. I change my mind about
many things quite often myself. For example, I will change my mind
about not touching the maximum blocksize consensus rule as soon as I
see some data that convinces that the proposed sizes are not very
risky.
Jorge Timón [ARCHIVE] /
npub1fx…cl2d8
2023-06-07 15:48:00
in reply to nevent1q…axac
Author Public Key
npub1fx98zxt3lzspjs5f4msr0fxysx5euucm29ghysryju7vpc9j0jzqtcl2d8Seen on
wss://relay.noswhere.comPublished at
2023-06-07 15:48:00Event JSON
{
"id": "703773012918103f949b59a69fa1b82a45d9bd89e8e0ac3b5370030d41e44a05",
"pubkey": "498a711971f8a0194289aee037a4c481a99e731b5151724064973cc0e0b27c84",
"created_at": 1686152880,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"04c055baa2674526726a622bd1bd37944209de47bcb89f54cba6db6abf55701c",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"457acc7c8466739a65792faaf3873a1bf2933a57a622420caf954f24c0cac416",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"1b29d94ee81e1ee0479f1db4bc4ac887407bd470a0d7060e76f8ab27fdd57e50"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-08-21\n📝 Original message:On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 12:23 PM, Milly Bitcoin via bitcoin-dev\n\u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e For the 73th time or so this month on this list:\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e The maximum block size consensus rule limits mining centralization\n\u003e\u003e (which is currently pretty bad).\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e Instead of posting all these messages with bald claims why don't you work on\n\u003e a decentralization metric which you can point to?\n\nPlease start with the centralization metrics we both agree are\nnecessary instead of keeping insulting me publicly and privately.\n\n\u003e (instead of trying to\n\u003e claim people don't understand things which is clearly not the case, You are\n\u003e just attacking people you don't agree with).\n\nI'm not inventing this, he recently said so himself publicly on this\nmailing list:\n\n\"I don't believe that the maximum block size has much at all to do with\nmining centralization\"\n\nhttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/009960.html\n\nIt is therefore not surprising that non-developers and developers with\nless experience in Bitcoin than Gavin have similar misunderstandings.\n\nThat claim seems in contradiction with his earlier analysis:\nhttp://gavinandresen.ninja/are-bigger-blocks-better-for-bigger-miners\n\n\"I ran some simulations, and if blocks take 20 seconds to propagate, a\nnetwork with a miner that has 30% of the hashing power will get 30.3%\nof the blocks.\"\n\nThat's why I was surprised when he denied the relation between the\nconsensus maximum size and mining centralization, but hey, people\nchange their minds and that's completely fine. I change my mind about\nmany things quite often myself. For example, I will change my mind\nabout not touching the maximum blocksize consensus rule as soon as I\nsee some data that convinces that the proposed sizes are not very\nrisky.",
"sig": "7d0906f96bb953d7fae24d28d40811216415239321310ac420feafa15861afb3743be17ca351e00a3610e75c6c255aeb126f53696f53549fd585a15649776b61"
}