public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chris Page <pagecr@gmail.com>
To: Andrew Lapp <lapp0@purdue.edu>
Cc: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net"
	<bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Request for comments on hybrid, PoW/PoS enhancement for Bitcoin
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 20:21:58 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAEG8yznS0OHSEM0e9WVtCvdmRzemHRyd4XCgXwY+x5sNiHghrA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54EE459B.1090301@purdue.edu>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1068 bytes --]

 I definitely need to have an deeper understanding of that paper before
proceeding.   Thanks for the reference!

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 4:58 PM, Andrew Lapp <lapp0@purdue.edu> wrote:

> Having stakeholders "endorse" blocks has, according to you, the benefits
> of increasing the number of full nodes and making a 51% attack more
> expensive. It seems to me it would have the opposite effects and other
> negative side effects. Any stakeholder that has "won" could just be running
> an SPV client and be informed by a full node that they have won, then
> cooperate to collect the reward. You are mistaking proof of stake as a
> proof you are running a full node. At the same time, the network becomes
> cheaper to attack in proportion to the amount of the block reward that is
> paid to "endorsers". Another side effect is that miners would have a bigger
> economy of scale. The more stake a miner has, the more they can "endorse"
> their own blocks and not others blocks. I recommend reading this:
> https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/pos.pdf
>
> -Andrew Lapp
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1533 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2015-02-26  1:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-02-25 21:58 [Bitcoin-development] Request for comments on hybrid, PoW/PoS enhancement for Bitcoin Andrew Lapp
2015-02-26  1:21 ` Chris Page [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-02-23 19:27 [Bitcoin-development] Request for comments on hybrid " Chris Page
2015-02-24 14:54 ` Jameson Lopp
2015-02-24 17:13   ` Chris Page
2015-02-25 12:30 ` Mike Hearn
2015-02-25 13:43   ` Chris Page

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAEG8yznS0OHSEM0e9WVtCvdmRzemHRyd4XCgXwY+x5sNiHghrA@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=pagecr@gmail.com \
    --cc=bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=lapp0@purdue.edu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox