From: Karl <gmkarl@gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proposal: Force to do nothing for first 9 minutes to save 90% of mining energy
Date: Sun, 16 May 2021 14:10:12 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALL-=e45Q_spVnFqVvGAK9c3QzZ=-c_WNwCO-y30q7z-j6orSA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d35dee03-2d19-e80a-c577-2151938f9203@web.de>
[sorry if I haven't replied to the other thread on this, I get swamped
by email and don't catch them all]
This solution is workable but it seems somewhat difficult to me at this time.
The clock might be implementable on a peer network level by requiring
inclusion of a transaction that was broadcast after a 9 minute delay.
Usually a 50% hashrate attack is needed to reverse a transaction in
bitcoin. With this change, this naively appears to become a 5%
hashrate attack, unless a second source of truth around time and order
is added, to verify proposed histories with.
A 5% hashrate attack is much harder here, because the users of mining
pools would be mining only 10% of the time, so compromising mining
pools would not be as useful.
Historically, hashrate has increased exponentially. This means that
the difficulty of performing an attack, whether it is 5% or 50%, is
still culturally infeasible because it is a multiplicative, rather
than an exponential, change.
If this approach were to be implemented, it could be important to
consider how many block confirmations people wait for to trust their
transaction is on the chain. A lone powerful miner could
intentionally fork the chain more easily by a factor of 10. They
would need to have hashrate that competes with a major pool to do so.
> How would you prevent miners to already compute the simpler difficulty problem directly after the block was found and publish their solution directly after minute 9? We would always have many people with a finished / competing solution.
Such a chain would have to wait a longer time to add further blocks
and would permanently be shorter.
> Your proposal won’t save any energy because it does nothing to decrease the budget available to mine a block (being the block reward).
You are assuming this budget is directly related to energy
expenditure, but if energy is only expended for 10% of the same
duration, this money must now be spent on hardware. The supply of
bitcoin hardware is limited.
In the long term, it won't be, so a 10% decrease is a stop-gap
measure. Additionally, in the long term, we will have quantum
computers and AI-designed cryptography algorithms, so things will be
different in a lot of other ways too.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-16 18:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-14 21:41 [bitcoin-dev] Proposal: Force to do nothing for first 9 minutes to save 90% of mining energy Michael Fuhrmann
2021-05-15 22:14 ` René Pickhardt
2021-05-15 22:19 ` Pavol Rusnak
2021-05-16 15:30 ` Zac Greenwood
2021-05-16 18:10 ` Karl [this message]
2021-05-16 20:31 ` Anton Ragin
2021-05-16 22:06 ` Eric Voskuil
2021-05-16 23:29 ` Karl
2021-05-16 21:15 ` Zac Greenwood
2021-05-16 22:05 ` Karl
2021-05-17 9:34 ` Zac Greenwood
2021-05-17 2:58 ` Luke Dashjr
2021-05-17 12:39 ` Anton Ragin
2021-05-18 7:46 ` ZmnSCPxj
2021-05-17 19:17 ` Michael Fuhrmann
2021-05-18 8:04 ` ZmnSCPxj
2021-05-17 5:17 ` yanmaani
2021-05-17 13:14 befreeandopen
2021-05-17 13:53 ` Anton Ragin
2021-05-17 17:28 ` Keagan McClelland
2021-05-17 23:02 ` Anton Ragin
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='CALL-=e45Q_spVnFqVvGAK9c3QzZ=-c_WNwCO-y30q7z-j6orSA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=gmkarl@gmail.com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
/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