Erik Aronesty [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2016-07-26 📝 Original message:- Flags will be mined ...
📅 Original date posted:2016-07-26
📝 Original message:- Flags will be mined selfishly, and not published until the advantage
gained from withholding is less than the mining reward. This effect may
kill the decentralization features, since big miners will be the only ones
that can selfish-mine flags. Indeed, collusion would be encouraged... just
ship the flag to the miners you do business with, and no one else. At the
expense of loss of flag revenue, your in-group would gain a massive
advantage in main-chain mining.
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Tom via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > #Basic idea:
> >
> > Ideally, all miners would begin hashing the next block at exactly the
> same
> > time. Miners with a head start are more profitable, and the techniques
> that
> > help miners receive and validate blocks quickly create centralization
> > pressure.
> >
> > What if there was something that acted like the starting flag at a race,
> > which could suddenly wave and cause all of the miners to simultaneously
> > begin hashing the next block?
> >
> > #Implementation:
> >
> > Let a sync flag be a message consisting of:
> >
> > 1. Hash of the previous block.
> > 2. Bitcoin address
> > 3. Nonce
> >
> > This tiny message could propagate through the network at maximum speed.
> If
> > miners had to include the hash of this flag in the next block, then all
> > miners wait for this flag, and when it suddenly spread through the
> network,
> > all miners could simultaneously begin hashing the next block.
>
> What you describe in this part of your message can be done with no forks
> whatsoever and I think that this is enough. Don't really see the reason for
> any change in funding.
>
> The idea of sending out a block header is essentially what I called
> "optimistic mining" and has been described in more detail in my blog here;
> http://zander.github.io/posts/Innovation%20-%20OnlineScaling/
>
> The video explains with graphics too...
>
> You may find this interesting :)
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160726/f4924d63/attachment-0001.html>;
📝 Original message:- Flags will be mined selfishly, and not published until the advantage
gained from withholding is less than the mining reward. This effect may
kill the decentralization features, since big miners will be the only ones
that can selfish-mine flags. Indeed, collusion would be encouraged... just
ship the flag to the miners you do business with, and no one else. At the
expense of loss of flag revenue, your in-group would gain a massive
advantage in main-chain mining.
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Tom via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > #Basic idea:
> >
> > Ideally, all miners would begin hashing the next block at exactly the
> same
> > time. Miners with a head start are more profitable, and the techniques
> that
> > help miners receive and validate blocks quickly create centralization
> > pressure.
> >
> > What if there was something that acted like the starting flag at a race,
> > which could suddenly wave and cause all of the miners to simultaneously
> > begin hashing the next block?
> >
> > #Implementation:
> >
> > Let a sync flag be a message consisting of:
> >
> > 1. Hash of the previous block.
> > 2. Bitcoin address
> > 3. Nonce
> >
> > This tiny message could propagate through the network at maximum speed.
> If
> > miners had to include the hash of this flag in the next block, then all
> > miners wait for this flag, and when it suddenly spread through the
> network,
> > all miners could simultaneously begin hashing the next block.
>
> What you describe in this part of your message can be done with no forks
> whatsoever and I think that this is enough. Don't really see the reason for
> any change in funding.
>
> The idea of sending out a block header is essentially what I called
> "optimistic mining" and has been described in more detail in my blog here;
> http://zander.github.io/posts/Innovation%20-%20OnlineScaling/
>
> The video explains with graphics too...
>
> You may find this interesting :)
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160726/f4924d63/attachment-0001.html>;