From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from fraxinus.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DEFBC0177 for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 12:31:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fraxinus.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 698E886432 for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 12:31:44 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from fraxinus.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jznULFFW28Fs for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 12:31:41 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: delayed 00:18:32 by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from APC01-HK2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-oln040092255069.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.92.255.69]) by fraxinus.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4568086427 for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 12:31:41 +0000 (UTC) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=Kn9l5bsi0aTvqwMGqB65tP7rRSPe8uZ3mBY+PdJobUQ7x1uDWULMTXf0D4NYlBWzeibM5XEiWOTkXLryxD7Fup7cAE0PvBRbdLjy0teJ42LKt7pYJJkprbJuI8+u768TCfwIIwqLYc/wJSPrEhMbQGCUtHTdXIQ1OWH1aKi8h5Os/nCIeMtNWHU6VWDgbKWeV7xSI53d6m+EVIfqrth/x8UAuhzpspbn/UaxRbb0DWFLECQYkQ0sFw2MhD8jRK2anP518t9GW49CPjYnnrrA5OJJV//TgiLUeHES4hoosX8Cz+WVhuUxU/xxPLWzKwxIF32t4L37T1elV9Geo5hsGQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=SZWJ6Kqv/Xc1cdSwnZG6D0UAPOG2b/MY+m/CEM70aqI=; b=ij9wFPgt8tJDsR4diN7uN1LXR9Wzynsjv3cONCXZNqlYY4ypqTlHwm9s4U8CJQ55AaJmyzT+2Q3v6TSdqDrnO5HvAgPNLBM+vO255oHX6dPLE5AObfrh6N3caYQPhBT66yCcJPP2V8yY7THJzNV8pjyORTbCwI6OKU9jtnlFVC6rNZAYSA88Cdr73i/rnn33Wz2sU2a26NtOVVd4YENPYIZxIFhpNltADJzCxBSmYV1EMTn/rMctUM+X4ITfh0AqswwRCHTyZMO6134KC7R1pB/JXnhUZDxOo+Phq1piF1ERJFO1KHs8d7lLvLL5nHPsjlzJNLg878IjQNm+oTIftw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=none; dmarc=none; dkim=none; arc=none Received: from SG2APC01FT117.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com (2a01:111:e400:7ebd::3c) by SG2APC01HT103.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com (2a01:111:e400:7ebd::300) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2814.13; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 11:58:33 +0000 Received: from PS2P216MB0179.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (10.152.250.51) by SG2APC01FT117.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.250.221) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2814.13 via Frontend Transport; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 11:58:33 +0000 Received: from PS2P216MB0179.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::315b:9cb9:696c:eeec]) by PS2P216MB0179.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::315b:9cb9:696c:eeec%12]) with mapi id 15.20.2835.021; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 11:58:33 +0000 From: LORD HIS EXCELLENCY JAMES HRMH To: Dave Scotese , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion , "David A. Harding" Thread-Topic: [bitcoin-dev] Block solving slowdown question/poll Thread-Index: AQHV/7A8w4IHNFTeo0u9uD34zHFHZ6hUPsmAgABCDp0= Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2020 11:58:33 +0000 Message-ID: References: , <20200322075415.3xttkgldluzqyv4g@ganymede> In-Reply-To: <20200322075415.3xttkgldluzqyv4g@ganymede> Accept-Language: en-AU, en-US Content-Language: en-AU X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-incomingtopheadermarker: OriginalChecksum:DC3AC0DFBAA0C5303C9A48F9CE79D466EEC7B10688C5C8DB2445EA3779B194F6; UpperCasedChecksum:04FA46AC62A152D70C9161457D591E489688B01005EB032216F391019AFF3E05; SizeAsReceived:7081; Count:45 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-tmn: [khcPih3gXUhvttDX9MNDR2Zww+WjqoWt] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-incomingheadercount: 45 x-eopattributedmessage: 0 x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 20a3b166-61e0-4076-18ea-08d7ce5858a1 x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: SG2APC01HT103: x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: dKHh6zjr/RgVB8D5lSmcuciIYfLD13k2i2TXi4akMmVz5wZc7RfPzevPH2ZmOmU0LScvj9xcLNFjS1hYHIV3WPUhtPbfe2VKAPbhAEUfbgnEqoKMStdDHKGEXXAgBTh4lm6DzasmJb8tfQCAoOtYv7MvPrWw7LHGQzIgz6LIeuewIaiYcHuei9nbRssQ3XVr x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 5d+w1kkqZhYJDO/8YP9HY0J7GBn7ZF2QX/5O4QJvOPSZr0fz9GtZ1SV7xSi2lwUmPfs2DqTOBQdvKetc/8HAHIGqX1iZ0DxmmwmiR9gPbXXsC7YqcTdWj9GSJ3XXQ2y5Gu95N0XryGq1NZTYk+fmFw== x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_PS2P216MB0179EC99BDE0E3388F2627F89DF30PS2P216MB0179KORP_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-RMS-PersistedConsumerOrg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 20a3b166-61e0-4076-18ea-08d7ce5858a1 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-rms-persistedconsumerorg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 22 Mar 2020 11:58:33.4961 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SG2APC01HT103 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 22 Mar 2020 14:09:58 +0000 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 12:31:44 -0000 --_000_PS2P216MB0179EC99BDE0E3388F2627F89DF30PS2P216MB0179KORP_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There seems to be the real possibility that miners are simply trying to opt= imise mining profit by limiting the average hash rate during the retargetin= g, saving some electricity but poorly considering the overall situation whe= re they give opportunity to other miners probably raising the hashrate for = the next period. It is far more profitable for the ecosystem considering th= e whole to hold a lottery for minig as has been discussed elsewhere some ti= me ago. Regards, LORD HIS EXCELLENCY JAMES HRMH ________________________________ From: bitcoin-dev on behalf= of David A. Harding via bitcoin-dev Sent: Sunday, 22 March 2020 6:54 PM To: Dave Scotese ; Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Block solving slowdown question/poll On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 11:40:24AM -0700, Dave Scotese via bitcoin-dev wrot= e: > [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 --_000_PS2P216MB0179EC99BDE0E3388F2627F89DF30PS2P216MB0179KORP_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
There seems to be the real possibility that miners are simply trying to opt= imise mining profit by limiting the average hash rate during the retargetin= g, saving some electricity but poorly considering the overall situation whe= re they give opportunity to other miners probably raising the hashrate for the next period. It is far more p= rofitable for the ecosystem considering the whole to hold a lottery for min= ig as has been discussed elsewhere some time ago.

Regards,
LORD HIS EXCELLENCY JAMES HRMH


From: bitcoin-dev <bit= coin-dev-bounces@lists.linuxfoundation.org> on behalf of David A. Hardin= g via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Sent: Sunday, 22 March 2020 6:54 PM
To: Dave Scotese <dscotese@litmocracy.com>; Bitcoin Protocol D= iscussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Block solving slowdown question/poll
 
On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 11:40:24AM -0700, Dave Sco= tese 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
--_000_PS2P216MB0179EC99BDE0E3388F2627F89DF30PS2P216MB0179KORP_--