From: Chris Page <pagecr@gmail•com>
To: Andrew Lapp <lapp0@purdue•edu>
Cc: "bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net"
<bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Request for comments on hybrid, PoW/PoS enhancement for Bitcoin
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 20:21:58 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAEG8yznS0OHSEM0e9WVtCvdmRzemHRyd4XCgXwY+x5sNiHghrA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54EE459B.1090301@purdue.edu>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1068 bytes --]
I definitely need to have an deeper understanding of that paper before
proceeding. Thanks for the reference!
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 4:58 PM, Andrew Lapp <lapp0@purdue•edu> wrote:
> Having stakeholders "endorse" blocks has, according to you, the benefits
> of increasing the number of full nodes and making a 51% attack more
> expensive. It seems to me it would have the opposite effects and other
> negative side effects. Any stakeholder that has "won" could just be running
> an SPV client and be informed by a full node that they have won, then
> cooperate to collect the reward. You are mistaking proof of stake as a
> proof you are running a full node. At the same time, the network becomes
> cheaper to attack in proportion to the amount of the block reward that is
> paid to "endorsers". Another side effect is that miners would have a bigger
> economy of scale. The more stake a miner has, the more they can "endorse"
> their own blocks and not others blocks. I recommend reading this:
> https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/pos.pdf
>
> -Andrew Lapp
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1533 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-26 1:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-25 21:58 Andrew Lapp
2015-02-26 1:21 ` Chris Page [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-02-23 19:27 [Bitcoin-development] Request for comments on hybrid " Chris Page
2015-02-24 14:54 ` Jameson Lopp
2015-02-24 17:13 ` Chris Page
2015-02-25 12:30 ` Mike Hearn
2015-02-25 13:43 ` Chris Page
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=CAEG8yznS0OHSEM0e9WVtCvdmRzemHRyd4XCgXwY+x5sNiHghrA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=pagecr@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=lapp0@purdue$(echo .)edu \
/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