{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1s4lj77xuzcu7wy04afcr487f0r3za0f8n2775xrpkld2sv639mjqsd44kw","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1s4lj77xuzcu7wy04afcr487f0r3za0f8n2775xrpkld2sv639mjqsd44kw","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-07-23\n📝 Original message:On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Eric Lombrozo \u003celombrozo at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e Mainstream usage of cryptocurrency will be enabled primarily by direct\n\u003e party-to-party contract negotiation…with the use of the blockchain\n\u003e primarily as a dispute resolution mechanism. The block size isn’t about\n\u003e scaling but about supply and demand of finite resources. As demand for\n\u003e block space increases, we can address it either by increasing computational\n\u003e resources (block size) or by increasing fees. But to do the former we need\n\u003e a way to offset the increase in cost by making sure that those who\n\u003e contribute said resources have incentive to do so.\n\n\nThere are so many things wrong with this paragraph I just can't let it\nslide.\n\n\"Mainstream usage will be enabled primarily by...\"  Maybe. Maybe not, we\ndon't know what use case(s) will primarily take cryptocurrency mainstream.\nI believe it is a big mistake to pick one and bet \"THIS is going to be the\nwinner\".\n\n\"we can address it either by... or...\"  False dichotomy. There are lots of\nthings we can do to decrease costs, and a lot of things have ALREADY been\ndone (e.g. running a pruned full node).  I HATE the \"it must be this or\nthat\" \"us or them\" attitude, it fosters unproductive bickering and\nnegativity.\n\n(and yes, I'm human, I'm sure you can find instances in the recent past\nwhere I did it, too... mea culpa)\n\n-- \n--\nGavin Andresen\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150723/76ddbef2/attachment.html\u003e"}