From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from hemlock.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4716DC0177 for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 07:55:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hemlock.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E502887B3 for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 07:55:34 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from hemlock.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E-QBaRSgwhyK for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 07:55:33 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from newmail.dtrt.org (li1228-87.members.linode.com [45.79.129.87]) by hemlock.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 63AD3887AF for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 07:55:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from harding by newmail.dtrt.org with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jFvSF-0002C8-Fi; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 03:55:31 -0400 Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2020 03:54:15 -0400 From: "David A. Harding" To: Dave Scotese , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Message-ID: <20200322075415.3xttkgldluzqyv4g@ganymede> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ntdwhc3n4dq6vcvj" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Block solving slowdown question/poll X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2020 07:55:34 -0000 --ntdwhc3n4dq6vcvj Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 11:40:24AM -0700, Dave Scotese via bitcoin-dev wrote: > [Imagine] we also see mining power dropping off at a rate that > suggests the few days [until retarget] might become a few weeks, and > then, possibly, a few months or even the unthinkable, a few eons. I'm > curious to know if anyone has ideas on how this might be handled There are only two practical solutions I'm aware of: 1. Do nothing 2. Hard fork a difficulty reduction If bitcoins retain even a small fraction of their value compared to the previous retarget period and if most mining equipment is still available for operation, then doing nothing is probably the best choice---as block space becomes scarcer, transaction feerates will increase and miners will be incentivized to increase their block production rate. If the bitcoin price has plummeted more than, say, 99% in two weeks with no hope of short-term recovery or if a large fraction of mining equipment has become unusable (again, say, 99% in two weeks with no hope of short-term recovery), then it's probably worth Bitcoin users discussing a hard fork to reduce difficulty to a currently sustainable level. -Dave --ntdwhc3n4dq6vcvj Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEgxUkqkMp0LnoXjCr2dtBqWwiadMFAl53GacACgkQ2dtBqWwi adPZiw//ZmT7E8U/kg/xaCSGLvTt+UieMSr0d8DnxHmS3L7a4d8J02kJyCXYdEz9 JV7cNiWp6PAQp3e4YPlcd2jY0CbR6Dd9Vc1jeo8P8TozCSbSCoLZlwr3PYdZjgpD TEdCkXxyykbTVKFVLDddlXkZJXcHBXDUlFV7ez1PymOCAsAi1Fld/J0R5E5F+VTk tKCEeHwczss2HNoJzSf8gSqYPXHtwQ5hyWLvYigsX+Dcl0IKTIyzJUzLWdNHCjx8 GIeKE5ub3G3VjRIa1F9AeODPNxiNV+huleVj9NB8wXKyfhl+TBP8KCq3OYmv4hs8 eXU8vZJ+UbzN+rDmXhD7r6KFeb/tbcjr8DgSP3yE5cqCvLDur7mdWan8EHpDsndl I9tyi3wHbjP+qbr3OLepFWpA0LAFCsk33Cg2fi7shsadxIDfxUXt7StEocfJhY5h lslu0cmN135FZmskHA/HQaDdS5Pb9acDHswpPwno3kY8wo4fSVvsvchdUnavmgFG N0l2SQZG1qaTYnAILuFD7kU6ngfF7+2M4ck7UcOEbh0iPjLzY89/y4SWnbgTsTZe VCoffJUYJcEfidEbRZx41Ex0ZsqCgsR+S4vnqUd8b1hvTntqIGVFjfZB7GgklYvI 4AR8ZHmtwyybFVGS592/QPn1xB7uRrOwpA1i3yw44khaIRab6Yo= =WwX/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ntdwhc3n4dq6vcvj--