Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bitpay.com
	designates 209.85.213.177 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.213.177; envelope-from=jgarzik@bitpay.com;
	helo=mail-ig0-f177.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5450FAE1.5040508@certimix.com>
References: <CAE28kUS-uDbd_Br3H5BxwRm1PZFpOwLhcyyZT9b1_VfRaBC9jw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJHLa0PeB-DMs2zo680FRvaejV-K97k2g0Ti9pPdaNeH+gYmog@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAE28kUSPb3ZC1nJyX7H__7cAgXvOvPbZ+Tub+htGd5+tujZndg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJHLa0M20QjBOwhOwJWJUcPBLzmaX1uuPy-6ytvJQWLZy68aeg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAE28kUS7cr3i-pSew6Y+xvfLEY5D1mi4oHU-GXv+jEf-i_8sVQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABsx9T1RPkif1+DEsOLrFfr-sE=FCs_B5C5aZzKr6HZCHw15ag@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADfmNEk40DTHDB8if_y_2i_Omoszd_BgcSxf-oS+ZcQB0tZZhg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAS2fgSiz-XRVQ4V+KbrTUWG4=g=WGf8c-pF4b4fFnfyU9HOqQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAS2fgRjwg_XyvzHbMhmaiW85LmmsW3YiXHyhpKMHd2a03pH2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAE28kUSqqcsMJArK29nG+UCiTX9buiJbQoMb30-oH-G=eFxrnQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJqsvLCG2Cv=7wzDLotunEUTnAvdxVLSGrMEtkAnmdoBgONBsg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAS2fgR4-V10i2D=v5-ZR9rWYcBjPKyRgGvgnG3JAmPKr4x19Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADfmNE=2yw65aVEr=HVLWGrcQMbvpRKjraaYZehtfX=xTbdsiw@mail.gmail.com>
	<5450FAE1.5040508@certimix.com>
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 13:25:19 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJHLa0M5GBE69iVmFYm=uxSeVmB=iM-+9n-VW+XHg0hvDu=Ycg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sergio Lerner <sergiolerner@certimix.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Death by halving (pro-active proposals)
Precedence: list

Seconded - IMO a key future use of the chain will be securing other
chains.  I'm interested in pursuing the merged-mining angle.

Getting chain hashes to a miner, and getting that miner payment from
the chain, is key to this.  Consider a future where there are 10,000
chains secured by one block...


On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 10:34 AM, Sergio Lerner
<sergiolerner@certimix.com> wrote:
> Instead of discussing what will happen when the subsidy is halved (which
> nobody really knows) maybe we can think about of what we can do to
> mitigate any damage in case something unwanted happens. Let's be proactive.
>
> For instance, any form of merged-mining (like higher frequency
> side-chains) will end-up increasing miners profit, even by a small
> margin. Then that margin can compensate miners not to turn off their
> equipment. Then we can encourage merge-mining on SHA-256, instead of
> discouraging SHA-256 alt-coins.
>
> Also we can encourage mining during the "trouble" period by creating a
> donation pool: suppose we manage to convince miners to donate 1% of
> their revenue in order to pay back to the miners for the first month
> after the reward halving. If every block pays 1% for 10 months, then
> every block during the first month of halving will earn 20% more.  Of
> course, convincing miners of this may be difficult, but not impossible.
> It could be done automatically with nLockTime freeze of transactions
> with high fees, so no TTP is necessary.
>
> So here are two proposals, any other idea?
>
> Best regards,
>  Sergio.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development



-- 
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
BitPay, Inc.      https://bitpay.com/