Quote from: brg444 on September 04, 2015, 07:48:12 PM

Quote from: Peter R on September 04, 2015, 07:13:27 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 04, 2015, 07:09:30 PM

He is describe absolutely real and existing mining configurations which promise to worsen in the future given a removal of the blocksize cap.

Then why is the network propagation impedance so high? Answer: because he's talking about something hypothetical (that is unlikely to ever happen and may not even be possible).

Lies, lies and lies. You have no shame!

Evidence #1 :

Quote

As a more concrete example, the block relay network today communicates far less than one bit per bit of blocksize to relay a block (e.g. transmitting a 962597 byte block using 3804 bytes-- I wonder why instead you did not announce your discovery that the block relay network has beat the Shanon limit!

--- after all, by your metric it can transmit X bits of information over a channel which has _significantly_ less than X capacity).

Uhthis is an example of Greg Maxwell making a error. Everyone who understands information theory could see that. When I pointed out this error to Greg, he just tried to come up with another hypothetical argument for why the fee market won't exists, and dropped the line of argument you posted above.

It's easy to explain: the variable γ in my paper is the coding gain and describes the factor by which the information (the solved block) can be compressed. Sending 962597 bytes with only 3804 bytes is a coding gain of:

γ = 962597 / 3804 = 253

You can see right here that my proof takes this into account:

In order to produce larger blocks in the future, we'll need miners to come up with more efficient communication schemes similar to the relay network. This just allows them to produce block space for cheaper and for us to enjoy lower-cost transactions. Win-win.

(Note also that what matters is the network average, and not a few fast connections [although those fast connections do help to lower the network average.])