[Bitcoin-ml] Transaction mining priorities.

Andrew Johnson andrew.johnson83 at gmail.com
Wed Sep 20 18:32:19 UTC 2017


On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 4:23 AM Tom Zander via bitcoin-ml <
bitcoin-ml at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Wednesday, 20 September 2017 03:07:04 CEST Andrew Johnson wrote:
> > I’m trying to have
> > a productive conversation with you here, perhaps I’m wasting my time.
> > I’ll go ahead and respond to the rest of your message, but let’s try and
> > keep it rational, eh?  If you disagree with me, tell me why.
> ...
> > I’m not trying to be combative here, though you somewhat seem to be...
>
> Andrew,
>
> you used this thread to put forward a story of how miners work, you have so
> far not provided a shred of evidence to support your claims.
>
> You make it out like miners are short term opportunists, even though
> various
> people (you included) provided evidence to support the contrary. Is it so
> hard to grasp that a big investor in mining equipment actually looks beyond
> next month?


I was a miner(30-50TH back when the S5 was a big deal) for quite some
time(no longer as I don’t have the economies of scale that the mega farms
do), I’ve done the math and made these type of decisions for myself, so I’m
speaking from experience, albeit my own, not some massive poll that I’ve
taken of all miners(although I don’t sense that you’re operating on any
more direct data than I am). Please direct me to the evidence provided to
the contrary, perhaps I’m missing it in our exchange.


>
> You said more than once they only focus on very short term incentives, like
> a common child. This implies that miners are ignorant about economics and
> don’t know how to maximise profits by producing growth and stability.
> You continue to make claims about how they would behave, but without any
> evidence to back up your claims.


See my previous reply to Gal for some background on why I think the way
that I do.

>
>
> Then to top it off, you take at least two of my statements, literally
> rewrite them to say something else and criticize your version like it was
> me
> saying it.


I thought(and still do) your analogies were poor as I understood them.  If
I misunderstood them, please enlighten me, as I asked in my previous
message.

>
>
> Andrew, if this is your way of having a productive conversation, I’m going
> to politely disagree with you.
>
> End rant.
>
> If you disagree on something as fuzzy and personal as miners incentives
> then
> its Ok to state this as an opinion and let me try to sell this idea to
> miners anyway.
> If you think I’ll fail, thats my time wasted. I don’t really understand why
> you want to convince me my assumption is wrong.


That’s what I’m doing, disagreeing.

You’re of course more than welcome to try and sell the idea to anyone you
like. But you posted to a public mailing list, ostensibly seeking feedback.
Not sure why you’re so surprised when you’re getting it.

>
>
> --
> Tom Zander
> Blog: https://zander.github.io
> Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-ml mailing list
> bitcoin-ml at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-ml
>
-- 
Andrew Johnson
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-ml/attachments/20170920/cef9da7c/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the bitcoin-ml mailing list