From: "Raúl Martínez" <rme@i-rme•es>
To: Ron Elliott <ronaldbelliott@gmail•com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposals for improving Bitcoin mining decentralization
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:01:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+8=xuLCAyYGV6hmdKRxOGNGHyQvkgnGcwKNN=1JYUhSzvxD2w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMEND1hS2j6dSjwvRSmVn_=UV-r7gujJ+Wo1VLH3nH54F3vBmQ@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3687 bytes --]
Because he cant change the coinbase once the proof of work is done.
El 17/06/2014 15:58, "Ron Elliott" <ronaldbelliott@gmail•com> escribió:
> In this scenario how do you ensure the miner solving the block cannot
> reapportion the subsidy to himself rather than the pool?
> On Jun 17, 2014 2:09 AM, "Raúl Martínez" <rme@i-rme•es> wrote:
>
>> First of all I apologice due to the possible mistakes in my writing
>> below, I am not a Bitcoin developer but I have some knowledge about it.
>>
>> ----
>>
>> We all know the recent news, Ghash pool controlling 51% of the hashrate.
>> While some consider it a threat others think that is not harmful.
>>
>> The thing is that we have to do something to stop this from happening
>> again.
>>
>> My proposal is to start thinking about miners that join a pool like
>> independent miners and not slave miners, this includes creating a new
>> mining protocol that does not rely on the pool sending the list of
>> transactions to include in a block. Each individual miner has to collect
>> transactions by his own and mine that, this can be achieved by running a
>> full node or by running a SPV like node that ask other nodes for
>> transactions.
>>
>> Once this protocol is developed and standarised we as a community could
>> require all pools to use it (because its better, because is more
>> trustless...), not by imposing it but by recommending it.
>>
>> Pool owners could send some instructions using this protocol to the miner
>> about how many transactions to include per block (some pools want small
>> blocks), how many 0 fee transactions to include, how much is the minimum
>> fee per Kb to include transactions and some info about the Coinbase field
>> in the block.
>>
>> This way is impossible to perform some of the possible 51% attacks:
>>
>> - A pool owner cant mine a new chain (selfish mining) (pool clients
>> have a SPV or full node that has checkpoints and ask other peers about the
>> length of the chain)
>> - A pool owner can't perform double spends or reverse transactions
>> (pool clients know all the transactions relayed to the network, they know
>> if they are already included on a block)
>> - A pool owner cant decide which transactions not to include (but
>> they can configure the minimum fee).
>> - A pool owner cant get all the rewards by avoiding other pools from
>> mining blocks (Because the pool client knows the last block independently
>> that is from his pool or other).
>>
>>
>> The only thing that a 51% pool owner can do is to shut down his pool and
>> drop the hashrate by 51% because he does not control the miners.
>>
>> If the pool owner owns all the hardware in the pool my proposal is not
>> valid, if the pool clients dont use this protocol my proposal is not valid.
>>
>>
>> I want to know if this is possible or its been developed or there is
>> already a working protocol that works like this, also I want to read other
>> people's ways to address this threat, thanks for reading.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> HPCC Systems Open Source Big Data Platform from LexisNexis Risk Solutions
>> Find What Matters Most in Your Big Data with HPCC Systems
>> Open Source. Fast. Scalable. Simple. Ideal for Dirty Data.
>> Leverages Graph Analysis for Fast Processing & Easy Data Exploration
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/hpccsystems
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>
>>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4585 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-17 14:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-17 8:57 Raúl Martínez
2014-06-17 13:58 ` Ron Elliott
2014-06-17 14:01 ` Raúl Martínez [this message]
2014-06-17 14:06 ` Ron Elliott
2014-06-17 14:20 ` Christophe Biocca
2014-06-17 18:25 ` Karel Bílek
2014-06-17 19:01 ` Raúl Martínez
2014-06-17 15:58 ` Isidor Zeuner
2014-06-17 9:23 Mistr Bigs
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='CA+8=xuLCAyYGV6hmdKRxOGNGHyQvkgnGcwKNN=1JYUhSzvxD2w@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=rme@i-rme$(echo .)es \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=ronaldbelliott@gmail$(echo .)com \
/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