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 B9FBA8A6 for ; Sat, 25 Mar 2017 19:42:09 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-vk0-f53.google.com (mail-vk0-f53.google.com [209.85.213.53]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97B2520E for ; Sat, 25 Mar 2017 19:42:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vk0-f53.google.com with SMTP id s68so18625481vke.3 for ; Sat, 25 Mar 2017 12:42:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=BK0QItz3WXAzN+5UMaTp32txxLLSRJxWsOcyVrIq3JM=; b=p9J0ilMKf8Kls/P0Gb3z62MJjofvCpDyHZ3yeH2WyjyyshMaeRj0Veibc4D+3nfezd swkzDenUAzLfszvjQRLx1MVpgZ1UqxAiyyf0oioiXxduzWKwJ238ijuCue+ksU2JIEc0 6kp17Fu7r1s9fFm2ZQtbuODEkdAbs9N40HXnpWzObJ4Rb8/4MhRGL7Ij35xXu+I6qNm9 K7jRLOL2hG+dAmKUCPYleokIJYDKfnsM9cR8ThmyjzoX8yyibhW2mjqqGsfOAqJ2cMlL 5JNRqRhnU5Gc9nxK0UWNUqRSO6iz+9PJlpuPMJfYlLBheaeZfFz7vIn6xM/Mc/9/BKBV z5eQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=BK0QItz3WXAzN+5UMaTp32txxLLSRJxWsOcyVrIq3JM=; b=eIsPEXyZLzQ1mAJ7NQH8rsKQxdFNk4rF2F787Uf3LrfUJBw5hmqLuDSbIwrwz9df9H DPxdHTHzv6okXNaavHUnpT8/DroNC20V9oDSlPvXPVTYuhiXHiB9+Gm8xZ5dSljyDa3l yeBlYhS5Mg6yR2HePqwDqBDnnC2zwlvFvdB9GwcySFSstwyV6OtaorINAk6V+3dKgaqw DMalt7TMMhOFVxESmeq0Kn0klvyZ3gXnoTwNYxZggpzgKbjRSmXmi8zXh1yBpdwHwkdY N+c8sedUOTopdKhVRkZfLQdovR4yYTD7n0Hh1+IaIs10FpNsBzbRUmhZZrWSvF6MCKV3 oMjA== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H2vQOevt76hvWvgzQNRM9Rlb+bcaf5LJXNbTg6A4pbVECaFCZ+qMJ7c318JqreiEv0bX9AYl51nYbzXcw== X-Received: by 10.31.26.86 with SMTP id a83mr5486198vka.3.1490470927434; Sat, 25 Mar 2017 12:42:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.103.26.132 with HTTP; Sat, 25 Mar 2017 12:41:47 -0700 (PDT) From: Nathan Cook Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 22:41:47 +0300 Message-ID: To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113d2f1a2d8b97054b934e4d X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 19:44:58 +0000 Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Multi-hash mining with Bitcoin holder voting X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 19:42:09 -0000 --001a113d2f1a2d8b97054b934e4d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Further to recent posts to this list concerning mining with more than one hash function, Adam Perlow and me have a (longish) proposal/analysis on combining multi-hash with bitcoin stake voting on what the mix of hashes should be. Two novelties are: * Targeting a ratio of blocks mined under each hash function, in a similar way to difficulty targeting. * Analysis of voting on this ratio in terms of "voting on a simplex", using extant research to choose a good method of doing so. One point about mining under multiple hashes is that it offers existing miners a way back in after a contentious hard fork. Shame to waste all that hardware=E2=80=A6 Read at http://topynate.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/proportionateresponse.pdf (archived at http://www.webcitation.org/6pEZLlZoW) Nathan Cook --001a113d2f1a2d8b97054b934e4d Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Further to recent posts to this list concerning mining wit= h more than one hash function, Adam Perlow and me have a (longish) proposal= /analysis on combining multi-hash with bitcoin stake voting on what the mix= of hashes should be. Two novelties are:

* Targeting a ratio o= f blocks mined under each hash function, in a similar way to difficulty tar= geting.
* Analysis of voting on this ratio in terms of "voti= ng on a simplex", using extant research to choose a good method of doi= ng so.

One point about mining under multiple hashe= s is that it offers existing miners a way back in after a contentious hard = fork. Shame to waste all that hardware=E2=80= =A6

--001a113d2f1a2d8b97054b934e4d--