From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 11:43:20 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/2.6.39-gentoo; KDE/4.6.5; x86_64; ; )
References: <CABsx9T2XLj4gZVPYodteaVCm0chR1n4WLUoSqB6+NnmWCDqHKQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E6F83C3.9020108@jerviss.org>
	<CABsx9T0JvnOaBy+irHtnN1zMWP8FiDTn=kn-01ky+V2MW1suTg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABsx9T0JvnOaBy+irHtnN1zMWP8FiDTn=kn-01ky+V2MW1suTg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201109141143.24165.luke@dashjr.org>
Cc: kjj <kjj@jerviss.org>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Difficulty adjustment / time issues
Precedence: list

On Wednesday, September 14, 2011 10:45:36 AM Gavin Andresen wrote:
> The block timestamp rules currently give HOURS of wiggle-room for
> timestamps. We can't change those rules without risking a chain split.

And those hours of wiggle-room are not enough to cause a problem.
The problem only comes in (AFAIK) when the existing rules are *not* enforced.

> Assuming a majority of pools/miners adopt the "discourage blocks with
> stale timestamps" rule, that should squash any incentive for cartels
> to try to start playing with difficulty-- you would have to have 50+%
> power to start, or you risk producing mostly orphan blocks.

As this is against pools/miners' interests, and doesn't seem to solve any real 
problems, I'm going to discourage its adoption if it ever gets done.