MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <uQBxE-Qbd-osime4uulMZZHdF_D7usA2EKsPjkTyXCHM0OakN2Wdoeriyrc73yWp5c5ULQNkIsRXAM64cCom7ecPvdwmatOyc9Kh1sTDpl4=@protonmail.com>
References: <uQBxE-Qbd-osime4uulMZZHdF_D7usA2EKsPjkTyXCHM0OakN2Wdoeriyrc73yWp5c5ULQNkIsRXAM64cCom7ecPvdwmatOyc9Kh1sTDpl4=@protonmail.com>
From: Jameson Lopp <jameson.lopp@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 12:29:05 -0400
Message-ID: <CADL_X_dZsQ9uOhoyAU3-s0DixSCwYgh0B+NE78zpo+ghYyphCw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Btc Ideas <btcideas@protonmail.com>, 
	Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113ce0e88a148b054bb8d70e
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Encouraging good miners
Precedence: list

--001a113ce0e88a148b054bb8d70e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Bitcoin chooses the "best chain" based upon the one that has the most
cumulative proof of work behind it. Are you proposing that the cumulative
proof of work be ignored if two blocks are within a certain threshold of
each others' work and if so, the number of transactions in the block / the
size of the block should be used as a "tie breaker?"

I think this idea needs more fleshing out of exactly how it would work,
with careful consideration that adding complexity to the best chain logic
could introduce exploitable flaws.

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Btc Ideas via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> Add a preference for mined blocks to be the one with more transactions.
> This comes into play when 2 blocks of the same height are found. The first
> good block mined would be orphaned if it had less transactions than
> another. Optionally, have this rule apply to the current block and the
> previous one.
>
> This increases incentive for full blocks because a miner thinking the
> faster propagation of a smaller block will win him the reward, but that
> would no longer be a good assumption.
>
> I read some miners could attack a chain by mining small or empty blocks.
> This makes that a little more difficult, but they can still attack the
> chain many ways.
>
>
> Sent with ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com> Secure Email.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>

--001a113ce0e88a148b054bb8d70e
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">Bitcoin chooses the &quot;best chain&quot; based upon the =
one that has the most cumulative proof of work behind it. Are you proposing=
 that the cumulative proof of work be ignored if two blocks are within a ce=
rtain threshold of each others&#39; work and if so, the number of transacti=
ons in the block / the size of the block should be used as a &quot;tie brea=
ker?&quot;<div><br></div><div>I think this idea needs more fleshing out of =
exactly how it would work, with careful consideration that adding complexit=
y to the best chain logic could introduce exploitable flaws.</div></div><di=
v class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Mon, Mar 27, 2017=
 at 12:12 PM, Btc Ideas via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"ma=
ilto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@l=
ists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmai=
l_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left=
:1ex"><div>Add a preference for mined blocks to be the one with more transa=
ctions. This comes into play when 2 blocks of the same height are found. Th=
e first good block mined would be orphaned if it had less transactions than=
 another. Optionally, have this rule apply to the current block and the pre=
vious one.<br></div><div><br></div><div>This increases incentive for full b=
locks because a miner thinking the faster propagation of a smaller block wi=
ll win him the reward, but that would no longer be a good assumption.<br></=
div><div><br></div><div>I read some miners could attack a chain by mining s=
mall or empty blocks. This makes that a little more difficult, but they can=
 still attack the chain many ways.<br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><=
div class=3D"m_8850343332467748790protonmail_signature_block"><div class=3D=
"m_8850343332467748790protonmail_signature_block-proton">Sent with <a href=
=3D"https://protonmail.com" target=3D"_blank">ProtonMail</a> Secure Email.<=
br></div></div><div><br></div><br>______________________________<wbr>______=
___________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.=
<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org=
/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-<wbr>dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>

--001a113ce0e88a148b054bb8d70e--