Feedback-ID: i525146e8:Fastmail
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2022 18:19:38 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Russell O'Connor <roconnor@blockstream.com>,
 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Message-ID: <Y1HJeq5wsBVV64mS@petertodd.org>
References: <CAD5xwhjXh33AdK96eToHtDP3t_Zx5JbxCqJFbAQRRRKy6rFC2Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <903a46d95473714a7e11e33310fe9f56@yancy.lol>
 <CAD5xwhgKw+jWkadAvUU3KOqT19LmGX6vhUQFpZfJ_Zk0AjTcNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <2f4344b4c7952c3799f8766ae6b590bf@yancy.lol>
 <CAD5xwhjFeUPGFfpNTt=4iuZMYAzBOc5vMuai0vxJCN9NO9e0dw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMZUoKkbDjeMKX3zsBpOKOS2cXQNbC+RDA=Zkxxy4r4xP2m2Yw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="raLw66OImeca2Bdl"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAMZUoKkbDjeMKX3zsBpOKOS2cXQNbC+RDA=Zkxxy4r4xP2m2Yw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Does Bitcoin require or have an honest majority
 or a rational one? (re rbf)
Precedence: list


--raLw66OImeca2Bdl
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 10:30:26AM -0400, Russell O'Connor via bitcoin-dev =
wrote:
> It is most certainly the case that one can construct situations where not
> mining on the tip is going to be the prefered strategy.  But even if that
> happens on occasion, it's not like the protocol immediately collapses,
> because mining off the tip is indistinguishable from being a high latency
> miner who simply didn't receive the most work block in time.  So it is mo=
re

I don't believe that's a good argument.

A sufficiently large high latency miner who doesn't receive the most work b=
lock
in time would cause huge disruptions to the network, potentially causing ot=
her
miners to be unprofitable. I even gave a talk on this a few years back, on =
how
if Bitcoin mining in space becomes profitable, it'll cause enormous problems
due to the slow speed of light.

> of a question of how rare does it need to be, and what can we do to reduce
> the chances of such situations arising (e.g. updating our mining policy to
> leave some transactions out based on current (and anticipated) mempool
> conditions, or (for a sufficiently capitalized miner) leave an explicit,
> ANYONECANSPEND transaction output as a tip for the next miner to build up=
on
> mined blocks.)

=2E..at which point the large miners are likely to be significantly more
profitable than small miners, because they can collect more fees. That's a
disaster.

--=20
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org

--raLw66OImeca2Bdl
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEFcyURjhyM68BBPYTJIFAPaXwkfsFAmNRyXYACgkQJIFAPaXw
kfv+agf7BIyNBzVK7KXMOzoM0II6pUJZvSjYUabc+ZTLXUpN+OeMEhiCCC36pzHY
weKRIRbp4Th3uv/DtX/Efih7hJNBx+J5mdQjhjS2/PCM/WZUjud1NByIbj8QfM4N
DRNwXAYln/shxWHUDV7jqv7tjzp/QYFmpdPu1LbKPU0rymnR8fr6ZBowivvbaxn8
vpgyMi8t9/rzJ07+ZR0cgnpcVjy7XXHYh3SFho7W2sQXBClX8PPoOiliZnDy6FHj
d/zb/LIKCFrhROr5vDQ2FT34JzCBBoVPaH8bE8pocqNQkzl+fZXcTBpkSYbzNDzh
i2aRGAq0r9J5BknRK1sw3pJrJ9JLsA==
=dJxJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--raLw66OImeca2Bdl--