📅 Original date posted:2015-07-30
📝 Original message:On 30 July 2015 at 16:12, Jorge Timón <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> wrote:
> 1) Unlike previous blocksize hardfork proposals, this uses median time
> instead of block.nTime for activation. I like that more but my
> preference is still using height for everything. But that discussion
> is not specific to this proposal, so it's better if we discuss that
> for all of them here:
>
> http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-July/009731.html
Note that a "median" is a special case of a 50% percentile. If you desire
to apply a more stringent criteria you can use the 75th or even 90th
percentile.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percentile
Perhaps if a statistician (i.e. not me) could be found to offer her
services, she could become a resource for helping selecting the most
appropriate statistical algorithms on request (and implemented Integer math
as per Gavin, from memory), considering the consequences of learning
post-fork that a "bad statistical model" was chosen.
e.g. an exponentially weighted moving average is usually much less volatile
and harder to manipulate than a simple moving average, but still can
"respond" to short term drivers.
Regards,
Gary
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150730/b6d539f7/attachment.html>;
Gary Mulder [ARCHIVE] /
npub1c9…06mf3
2023-06-07 17:44:16
in reply to nevent1q…yuju
Author Public Key
npub1c9ycejwmtswm6xtr5gjynrmug8kcvqlgdcju9t6680y3pk67gwesp06mf3Published at
2023-06-07 17:44:16Event JSON
{
"id": "5d5f09f5fd41f4012867910acd772473edac54a53073f90f16d70fd11bc14f84",
"pubkey": "c1498cc9db5c1dbd1963a224498f7c41ed8603e86e25c2af5a3bc910db5e43b3",
"created_at": 1686152656,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"a5089d8cc94280b0825961adbe16d28b69a12ea3db4d49196026224a1cf60689",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"e4b37b2f0df336c58193636619e39cf7fa979285f0fd44d25cdfb2c0c8b75621",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"498a711971f8a0194289aee037a4c481a99e731b5151724064973cc0e0b27c84"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-07-30\n📝 Original message:On 30 July 2015 at 16:12, Jorge Timón \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e 1) Unlike previous blocksize hardfork proposals, this uses median time\n\u003e instead of block.nTime for activation. I like that more but my\n\u003e preference is still using height for everything. But that discussion\n\u003e is not specific to this proposal, so it's better if we discuss that\n\u003e for all of them here:\n\u003e\n\u003e http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-July/009731.html\n\n\nNote that a \"median\" is a special case of a 50% percentile. If you desire\nto apply a more stringent criteria you can use the 75th or even 90th\npercentile.\n\nhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percentile\n\nPerhaps if a statistician (i.e. not me) could be found to offer her\nservices, she could become a resource for helping selecting the most\nappropriate statistical algorithms on request (and implemented Integer math\nas per Gavin, from memory), considering the consequences of learning\npost-fork that a \"bad statistical model\" was chosen.\n\ne.g. an exponentially weighted moving average is usually much less volatile\nand harder to manipulate than a simple moving average, but still can\n\"respond\" to short term drivers.\n\nRegards,\nGary\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150730/b6d539f7/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "7e1963d6b2c42dbcb5e09520cb4d59da0dd5a114604d0eed94aea5b8d7e5fc1ba729d461828d0c193d16584c7872287074813ab8d06f8b59d6a832c2398efa90"
}