Chun Wang [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2015-06-01 📝 Original message:I cannot believe why Gavin ...
📅 Original date posted:2015-06-01
📝 Original message:I cannot believe why Gavin (who seems to have difficulty to spell my
name correctly.) insists on his 20MB proposal regardless the
community. BIP66 has been introduced for a long time and no one knows
when the 95% goal can be met. This change to the block max size must
take one year or more to be adopted. We should increase the limit and
increase it now. 20MB is simply too big and too risky, sometimes we
need compromise and push things forward. I agree with any solution
lower than 10MB in its first two years.
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Chun Wang <1240902 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Mike Hearn <mike at plan99.net> wrote:
>> Whilst it would be nice if miners in China can carry on forever regardless
>> of their internet situation, nobody has any inherent "right" to mine if they
>> can't do the job - if miners in China can't get the trivial amounts of
>> bandwidth required through their firewall and end up being outcompeted then
>> OK, too bad, we'll have to carry on without them.
>>
>> But I'm not sure why it should be a big deal. They can always run a node on
>> a server in Taiwan and connect the hardware to it via a VPN or so.
>
> Ignorant. You seem do not understand the current situation. We
> suffered from orphans a lot when we started in 2013. It is now your
> turn. If Western miners do not find a China-based VPN into China, or
> if Western pools do not manage to improve their connectivity to China,
> or run a node in China, it would be them to have higher orphans, not
> us. Because we have 50%+.
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Chun Wang <1240902 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Mike Hearn <mike at plan99.net> wrote:
>> Whilst it would be nice if miners in China can carry on forever regardless
>> of their internet situation, nobody has any inherent "right" to mine if they
>> can't do the job - if miners in China can't get the trivial amounts of
>> bandwidth required through their firewall and end up being outcompeted then
>> OK, too bad, we'll have to carry on without them.
>>
>> But I'm not sure why it should be a big deal. They can always run a node on
>> a server in Taiwan and connect the hardware to it via a VPN or so.
>
> Ignorant. You seem do not understand the current situation. We
> suffered from orphans a lot when we started in 2013. It is now your
> turn. If Western miners do not find a China-based VPN into China, or
> if Western pools do not manage to improve their connectivity to China,
> or run a node in China, it would be them to have higher orphans, not
> us. Because we have 50%+.
Published at
2023-06-07 15:36:04Event JSON
{
"id": "8dcd62093a30ef389f23bbcb1e3e2c5dacd3cf0e58aff824511ddf8224b500de",
"pubkey": "cb447013f90240d6e2c4941f91d80483153f692eeadd154f370ee96f23235a6b",
"created_at": 1686152164,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"112d0de527f63b466f07e709b55d1d4965f1c304d12170877aafb66f5cb05c67",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"bd88e9ed9b5ac035366d3c86e5b1d0c5a25834bb00533cb613fc32ecf45e642d",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"421e1241aa8e9b5cefc15c0afd6585b27498be477646dabe4a63839879206cea"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-06-01\n📝 Original message:I cannot believe why Gavin (who seems to have difficulty to spell my\nname correctly.) insists on his 20MB proposal regardless the\ncommunity. BIP66 has been introduced for a long time and no one knows\nwhen the 95% goal can be met. This change to the block max size must\ntake one year or more to be adopted. We should increase the limit and\nincrease it now. 20MB is simply too big and too risky, sometimes we\nneed compromise and push things forward. I agree with any solution\nlower than 10MB in its first two years.\n\nOn Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Chun Wang \u003c1240902 at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Mike Hearn \u003cmike at plan99.net\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e Whilst it would be nice if miners in China can carry on forever regardless\n\u003e\u003e of their internet situation, nobody has any inherent \"right\" to mine if they\n\u003e\u003e can't do the job - if miners in China can't get the trivial amounts of\n\u003e\u003e bandwidth required through their firewall and end up being outcompeted then\n\u003e\u003e OK, too bad, we'll have to carry on without them.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e But I'm not sure why it should be a big deal. They can always run a node on\n\u003e\u003e a server in Taiwan and connect the hardware to it via a VPN or so.\n\u003e\n\u003e Ignorant. You seem do not understand the current situation. We\n\u003e suffered from orphans a lot when we started in 2013. It is now your\n\u003e turn. If Western miners do not find a China-based VPN into China, or\n\u003e if Western pools do not manage to improve their connectivity to China,\n\u003e or run a node in China, it would be them to have higher orphans, not\n\u003e us. Because we have 50%+.\n\nOn Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Chun Wang \u003c1240902 at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Mike Hearn \u003cmike at plan99.net\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e Whilst it would be nice if miners in China can carry on forever regardless\n\u003e\u003e of their internet situation, nobody has any inherent \"right\" to mine if they\n\u003e\u003e can't do the job - if miners in China can't get the trivial amounts of\n\u003e\u003e bandwidth required through their firewall and end up being outcompeted then\n\u003e\u003e OK, too bad, we'll have to carry on without them.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e But I'm not sure why it should be a big deal. They can always run a node on\n\u003e\u003e a server in Taiwan and connect the hardware to it via a VPN or so.\n\u003e\n\u003e Ignorant. You seem do not understand the current situation. We\n\u003e suffered from orphans a lot when we started in 2013. It is now your\n\u003e turn. If Western miners do not find a China-based VPN into China, or\n\u003e if Western pools do not manage to improve their connectivity to China,\n\u003e or run a node in China, it would be them to have higher orphans, not\n\u003e us. Because we have 50%+.",
"sig": "dac976d8dbfc34a5b1d54954402d32a76502f0bcdb55ed6ce8ca105f48ec1c6f13e614067aaaf2e1512cc28e7a43c6ebeac53780d772a6e11a2c6ea50d6b27bd"
}