1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <joel.kaartinen@gmail.com>) id 1RTFej-0002TG-2e
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 23 Nov 2011 16:26:41 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.213.47 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.213.47; envelope-from=joel.kaartinen@gmail.com;
helo=mail-yw0-f47.google.com;
Received: from mail-yw0-f47.google.com ([209.85.213.47])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1RTFei-0000q8-BV
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 23 Nov 2011 16:26:40 +0000
Received: by ywb20 with SMTP id 20so1841821ywb.34
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Wed, 23 Nov 2011 08:26:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.152.106.130 with SMTP id gu2mr15280839lab.37.1322065594665;
Wed, 23 Nov 2011 08:26:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [85.156.201.252] (a85-156-201-252.elisa-laajakaista.fi.
[85.156.201.252])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id pc8sm16391383lab.8.2011.11.23.08.26.32
(version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 23 Nov 2011 08:26:33 -0800 (PST)
From: Joel Joonatan Kaartinen <joel.kaartinen@gmail.com>
To: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <201111231539.11080.andyparkins@gmail.com>
References: <201111231035.48690.andyparkins@gmail.com>
<CALxbBHW2KGv=sEvYqpGGsy8jjJ3+yE02BegwPhjGapuT9z7v_Q@mail.gmail.com>
<CABsx9T0VH5i0HrEjxfxxtzO2MtmN7UEyAUXoq9puc-1nKw3G4Q@mail.gmail.com>
<201111231539.11080.andyparkins@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 18:26:30 +0200
Message-ID: <1322065590.27400.232.camel@mei>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(joel.kaartinen[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1RTFei-0000q8-BV
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Addressing rapid changes in mining power
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 16:26:41 -0000
On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 15:39 +0000, Andy Parkins wrote:
> On 2011 November 23 Wednesday, Gavin Andresen wrote:
>
> > Bitcoin as-is doesn't have the "I got lucky and found an extremely
> > hard block" problem because the difficulty TARGET is used to compute
> > chain difficulty, not the actual hashes found.
>
> Good points. I don't think I have a response to that one.
If there's an upper bound on the difficulty a block is accepted to have
(even if it would've passed with significantly higher difficulty), that
could solve this issue. For example, take the median (or average) of the
past 2016 blocks and don't value any new block for more than maybe 4
times as difficult as that.
> I saw the "I got lucky" result as a benefit, as it made it harder to fork the
> chain. We got an advantage from the luck.
>
> I'll have to abandon this suggestion. It's not going to work.
>
> Thanks for the feedback everyone.
Don't be so hasty with that :)
- Joel
|
