Mike Hearn [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2013-09-05 📝 Original message:On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at ...
📅 Original date posted:2013-09-05
📝 Original message:On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Wendell <w at grabhive.com> wrote:
> Funny you should mention it! I just mocked this idea up last week, though
> I assumed a cruder system of "voting" to an address that corresponds to a
> feature -- literally, voting with your wallet (for your wallet, ad
> infinitum). I watched your talk about assurance contracts and other
> "hidden" features, but am not entirely sure that I understood it enough to
> know how it would work in this context. Sorry for the persistent
> hand-holding requests, but some advice would be very welcome.
>
Well, it's a bit complicated and needs some software development to do
well. The best way to fund a complex project would be to raise the money
using an assurance contr.... oh wait ;)
> If it is a real burden for the users, that's the best argument I've yet
> heard. However, my impression from Peter's post was that it would be fairly
> painless for them.
>
It could be automatic in the sense that users don't need to know it's
happening, but look at it this way. Gavin believes the future of computing
is mobile and tablets. I don't know about that, but let's assume for the
sake of argument he turns out to be right. These devices are expected to
have much longer battery life than laptops. Apps that spin up in the
background and use battery+radio can easily be seen as "abusive" by end
users. In fact, if you look in the Bitcoin Wallet section of the forum,
you'll see a giant argument by users of the Android app who are upset
because the app sometimes runs in the background *just to keep up with the
chain*! That's not even donating resources, it's just trying to ensure it
doesn't fall behind, and this enrages some users because it can have a
small but non-zero battery/bandwidth usage impact.
Given the number of complaints generated by just having the app sync
automatically, imagine what would happen if we started relaying blocks!
Generally the ethos and modus operandi of desktops is different to laptops
which is in turn different to mobiles/tablets. Things you can get away with
on more powerful machines that expect to be plugged in all the time are
verboten on more modern devices.
Now that said, I can easily see Bitcoin enthusiasts buying some kind of
cheap embedded device, maybe Raspberry Pi based, and plugging it into a
wall in order to donate to the network. That way it doesn't affect their
primary devices responsiveness or storage or battery life.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20130905/53170c33/attachment.html>;
📝 Original message:On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Wendell <w at grabhive.com> wrote:
> Funny you should mention it! I just mocked this idea up last week, though
> I assumed a cruder system of "voting" to an address that corresponds to a
> feature -- literally, voting with your wallet (for your wallet, ad
> infinitum). I watched your talk about assurance contracts and other
> "hidden" features, but am not entirely sure that I understood it enough to
> know how it would work in this context. Sorry for the persistent
> hand-holding requests, but some advice would be very welcome.
>
Well, it's a bit complicated and needs some software development to do
well. The best way to fund a complex project would be to raise the money
using an assurance contr.... oh wait ;)
> If it is a real burden for the users, that's the best argument I've yet
> heard. However, my impression from Peter's post was that it would be fairly
> painless for them.
>
It could be automatic in the sense that users don't need to know it's
happening, but look at it this way. Gavin believes the future of computing
is mobile and tablets. I don't know about that, but let's assume for the
sake of argument he turns out to be right. These devices are expected to
have much longer battery life than laptops. Apps that spin up in the
background and use battery+radio can easily be seen as "abusive" by end
users. In fact, if you look in the Bitcoin Wallet section of the forum,
you'll see a giant argument by users of the Android app who are upset
because the app sometimes runs in the background *just to keep up with the
chain*! That's not even donating resources, it's just trying to ensure it
doesn't fall behind, and this enrages some users because it can have a
small but non-zero battery/bandwidth usage impact.
Given the number of complaints generated by just having the app sync
automatically, imagine what would happen if we started relaying blocks!
Generally the ethos and modus operandi of desktops is different to laptops
which is in turn different to mobiles/tablets. Things you can get away with
on more powerful machines that expect to be plugged in all the time are
verboten on more modern devices.
Now that said, I can easily see Bitcoin enthusiasts buying some kind of
cheap embedded device, maybe Raspberry Pi based, and plugging it into a
wall in order to donate to the network. That way it doesn't affect their
primary devices responsiveness or storage or battery life.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20130905/53170c33/attachment.html>;