From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A53CFAC for ; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 16:32:46 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-wi0-f178.google.com (mail-wi0-f178.google.com [209.85.212.178]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BAFFFF2 for ; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 16:32:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wiclk2 with SMTP id lk2so70838779wic.0 for ; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 09:32:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=f70k57NLxeKWCcAGBjzNgq9ZTP4bB38Ex44vCmtNP2Y=; b=g0dqJ/4wi5vVw4r6TYq8RO/p9FA0z/FJrEtr/SdEZQTEeg6wAwW/81tnBoYZfqKjvW 5D9adk1yb/UWIIBn8iE7okwY0AMMxORgGED6wiyt+V7mA0uzMeEnIVFXbFyAeZHPsnOs dUQGSLeqwOEaPjEh1u/HOyeDSbdGpHd0N6oyQcz/yK+qczx8h7aAVs0TW8CaQKFdgYra S3q4pkBfrVgPTK4M6SC2G3sdLpGiVJTTwff3J5VurvZ1nLFqEPQiH2SESnFSzXbi/NVN ++OtCJyO62LuRmr7+HDcu86toMxKoJVWWJBJ2mWw9cmIpSEqUlJyQtpNficjuMehtyBF 0Afg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkyHX8bx/XPtiEN2kdhXPbUq0qE8YKn+oOJzfZBQ5yb9zdlyzcTOdHy6pjRLF93cTjiQ8SN MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.186.98 with SMTP id fj2mr19206385wic.58.1441989164399; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 09:32:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.37.5 with HTTP; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 09:32:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.37.5 with HTTP; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 09:32:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 18:32:44 +0200 Message-ID: From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= To: Dave Scotese Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c263d8ea130d051f7b430b X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Days Destroyed as block selection heuristic X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 16:32:46 -0000 --001a11c263d8ea130d051f7b430b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sep 11, 2015 12:27 PM, "Dave Scotese via bitcoin-dev" < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > Rather than (promising to, and when they don't actually, at least pretending to) use the first-seen block, I propose that a more sophisticated method of choosing which of two block solutions to accept. There's already a criterion to chose: the one with more work (in valid blocks) on top of it. --001a11c263d8ea130d051f7b430b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Sep 11, 2015 12:27 PM, "Dave Scotese via bitcoin-dev" <bitcoin-dev@lists.linu= xfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> Rather than (promising to, and when they don't actually, at least = pretending to) use the first-seen block, I propose that a more sophisticate= d method of choosing which of two block solutions to accept.=C2=A0

There's already a criterion to chose: the one with more = work (in valid blocks) on top of it.

--001a11c263d8ea130d051f7b430b--