From: Tom Harding <tomh@thinlink•com>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Defending against empty or near empty blocks from malicious miner takeover?
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 14:42:51 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f10ed0f1-73ee-a6fb-dddf-7a9234fe5c5b@thinlink.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABaSBayb-FAt0XOX9u+T3-Z2gJQAV-Y7xZS_k6YG74VhPqejQA@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 828 bytes --]
On 3/26/2017 1:22 PM, Bryan Bishop via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 2:05 PM, Peter R via bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
> <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>> wrote:
>
> With a tightening of the rule set, a hash power minority that has
> not upgraded will not produce a minority branch; instead they will
> simply have any invalid blocks they produce orphaned, serving as a
> wake-up call to upgrade.
>
>
> False. With bip9-based soft-fork-based activation of segwit, miner
> blocks will not be orphaned unless they are intentionally
> segwit-invalid (which they currently are not). If you have told miners
> otherwise, let me know.
>
A reasonable miner automatically checks every transaction seen, to see
if it might be valid with his own outputs substituted.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1971 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-26 21:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-24 16:03 CANNON
2017-03-24 16:27 ` Emin Gün Sirer
2017-04-14 2:22 ` CANNON
2017-03-24 17:29 ` Nick ODell
2017-03-24 17:37 ` Hampus Sjöberg
2017-03-24 19:00 ` Aymeric Vitte
2017-03-25 16:12 ` CANNON
2017-03-25 20:28 ` Peter R
2017-03-26 2:38 ` Alex Morcos
2017-03-26 9:13 ` Chris Pacia
2017-03-26 11:27 ` Alex Morcos
2017-03-26 19:05 ` Peter R
2017-03-26 20:20 ` Alphonse Pace
2017-03-26 20:22 ` Bryan Bishop
2017-03-26 20:37 ` Trevin Hofmann
2017-03-26 20:44 ` Bryan Bishop
2017-03-26 21:12 ` Eric Voskuil
2017-03-26 21:42 ` Tom Harding [this message]
2017-03-26 22:15 ` Eric Voskuil
2017-03-27 10:25 ` Aymeric Vitte
2017-03-26 3:00 ` [bitcoin-dev] Two altcoins and a 51% attack (was: Defending against empty or near empty blocks from malicious miner takeover?) Eric Voskuil
2017-03-24 19:00 ` [bitcoin-dev] Defending against empty or near empty blocks from malicious miner takeover? Aymeric Vitte
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=f10ed0f1-73ee-a6fb-dddf-7a9234fe5c5b@thinlink.com \
--to=tomh@thinlink$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
/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