{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1m230cem2yh3mtdzkg32qhj73uytgkyg5ylxsu083n3tpjnajxx4qqa2np2","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1m230cem2yh3mtdzkg32qhj73uytgkyg5ylxsu083n3tpjnajxx4qqa2np2","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-06-27\n📝 Original message:On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 12:09:16PM -0400, Michael Naber wrote:\n\u003e The goal of Bitcoin Core is to meet the demand for global consensus as\n\u003e effectively as possible. Please let's keep the conversation on how to best\n\u003e meet that goal.\n\nKeep in mind that Andresen and Hearn both propose that the majority of\nBitcoin users, even businesses, abandon the global consensus technology\naspect of Bitcoin - running full nodes - and instead adopt trust\ntechnology instead - running SPV nodes.\n\nWe're very much focused on meeting the demand for global consensus\ntechnology, but unfortunately global consensus is also has inherently\nO(n^2) scaling with current approaches available. Thus we have a fixed\ncapacity system where access is mediated by supply and demand\ntransaction fees.\n\n\u003e The off-chain solutions you enumerate are are useful solutions in their\n\u003e respective domains, but none of them solves the global consensus problem\n\u003e with any greater efficiency than Bitcoin does.\n\nSolutions like (hub-and-spoke) payment channels, Lightning, etc. allow\nusers of the global consensus technology in Bitcoin to use that\ntechnology in much more effcient ways, leveraging a relatively small\namount of global consensus to do large numbers of transactions\ntrustlessly.\n\n-- \n'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org\n0000000000000000007fc13ce02072d9cb2a6d51fae41fefcde7b3b283803d24\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 650 bytes\nDesc: Digital signature\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150627/f62ccdee/attachment.sig\u003e"}