From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr•org>
To: bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] RFC: MERGE transaction/script/process for forked chains
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2013 22:50:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201312172250.24887.luke@dashjr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131217224130.GC3180@nl.grid.coop>
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 10:41:30 PM Troy Benjegerdes wrote:
> I want to get some feedback.. I've used distributed version control
> systems for a long time, and the most useful feature is to be able
> to merge two different forks.
>
> So what's the equivalent of this for Bitcoin or other crypto-currencies?
>
> Let's suppose that me and my friends get 'islanded' from the rest of
> the internet for a week, but we still want to trade bitcoin. It would
> work if there are local miners, until we reconnect.
>
> Suppose we have the main chain (Alice), while bob is on a boat, trading
> with some friends, but has no network connectivity.
>
> When bob reconnects with Alice, a 'Merge' transaction happens where a
> miner looks at bob's forked blockchain, sees no double-spends, and
> includes BOTH chains.
>
> Now suppose someone on bob's boat has a buggy client, or sent a
> transaction before disconnect that results in a double-spend on the
> merge.
>
> So we have a merge conflict, which generally requires human interaction,
> so bob and his friends broadcast a MERGE request with a transaction fee
> sufficient to cover reconciling the double-spends, AND incentivize a
> miner to do some extra work to merge.
>
> Thoughts everyone?
This is interesting, but I'm not sure it has the right incentives. First, it
adds more reason for miners to *avoid* including transactions (they might turn
out to be double-spends and make merging costly). Second, it gives people
reason to double-spend (the miner might cover the cost of it). Finally, you
don't appear to address how to deal with the subsidy - do both miners get it?
Luke
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-17 22:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-17 22:41 Troy Benjegerdes
2013-12-17 22:48 ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-12-18 6:03 ` Troy Benjegerdes
2013-12-17 22:48 ` Mark Friedenbach
2013-12-17 22:50 ` Luke-Jr [this message]
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=201312172250.24887.luke@dashjr.org \
--to=luke@dashjr$(echo .)org \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
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