📅 Original date posted:2015-08-20 📝 Original message:On 8/20/2015 3:23 AM, ...

Tom Harding [ARCHIVE] /

npub1mse…mwjy

2023-06-07 17:36:21

in reply to nevent1q…uftg

📅 Original date posted:2015-08-20
📝 Original message:On 8/20/2015 3:23 AM, Milly Bitcoin via bitcoin-dev 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? (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).

Pieter built a nice simulation tool and posted some results.

I tweaked the parameters and ran the tool in a way that tested ONLY for
hashrate centralization effects, and did not conflate these with network
partitioning effects.

I found that small miners were not at all disadvantaged by large blocks.

The only person who commented on this result agreed with me. He also
complimented Pieter's insight (which is entirely appropriate since
Pieter did the hard work of creating the tool).

http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-June/008820.html

Author Public Key

npub1msef5qkfwz4t7qacwxz775wgdtlytph78g2g2z903x90874u263sypmwjy

Show more details

Published at

2023-06-07 17:36:21

Kind type

1 Short Text Note

Event JSON

{ "id": "55952b4b7ef7ce71b7849f58f876e74b1fb718774e23af86fb650eb8ebf5011c", "pubkey": "dc329a02c970aabf03b87185ef51c86afe4586fe3a148508af898af3fabc56a3", "created_at": 1686159381, "kind": 1, "tags": [ [ "e", "7ed22d6d4b773f63b7d7a74d45f8a3ef2ee47a84961e7f380d598c1822de0b82", "", "root" ], [ "e", "e7211b97f2a617337327ec4df69f407522cbf257f602eb4a83bad22772303ef8", "", "reply" ], [ "p", "1b29d94ee81e1ee0479f1db4bc4ac887407bd470a0d7060e76f8ab27fdd57e50" ] ], "content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-08-20\n📝 Original message:On 8/20/2015 3:23 AM, Milly Bitcoin via bitcoin-dev 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 Instead of posting all these messages with bald claims why don't you \n\u003e work on a decentralization metric which you can point to? (instead of \n\u003e trying to claim people don't understand things which is clearly not \n\u003e the case, You are just attacking people you don't agree with).\n\n\nPieter built a nice simulation tool and posted some results.\n\nI tweaked the parameters and ran the tool in a way that tested ONLY for \nhashrate centralization effects, and did not conflate these with network \npartitioning effects.\n\nI found that small miners were not at all disadvantaged by large blocks.\n\nThe only person who commented on this result agreed with me. He also \ncomplimented Pieter's insight (which is entirely appropriate since \nPieter did the hard work of creating the tool).\n\nhttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-June/008820.html", "sig": "a0dbd998c9ed4195f27b3bd54cb0e3783824391773cfde736399ae766f4715b4bfbffdb418e041037b8f8fdb4fd717396b536bd07685853b2896591143c745f3" }