summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/d3/c5e37487acc56242286c19fc4a4894115451cd
blob: fc9ceb6a0f6ffdd01e7ba6415d29a34922ca79e6 (plain)
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
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <makosoft@gmail.com>) id 1R3vVv-00073V-AA
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Wed, 14 Sep 2011 19:52:55 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.210.175 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.210.175; envelope-from=makosoft@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-iy0-f175.google.com; 
Received: from mail-iy0-f175.google.com ([209.85.210.175])
	by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1R3vVu-0000h8-Mk
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Wed, 14 Sep 2011 19:52:55 +0000
Received: by iadx2 with SMTP id x2so676565iad.34
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Wed, 14 Sep 2011 12:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.231.24.96 with SMTP id u32mr331773ibb.61.1316029969445; Wed,
	14 Sep 2011 12:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.231.158.195 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 12:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABsx9T0JvnOaBy+irHtnN1zMWP8FiDTn=kn-01ky+V2MW1suTg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABsx9T2XLj4gZVPYodteaVCm0chR1n4WLUoSqB6+NnmWCDqHKQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E6F83C3.9020108@jerviss.org>
	<CABsx9T0JvnOaBy+irHtnN1zMWP8FiDTn=kn-01ky+V2MW1suTg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 20:52:49 +0100
Message-ID: <CAB=c7TpFE_28BNpkW27kKK41w8QdaMKJ96=6H=xqonVDdTWUkA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Aidan Thornton <makosoft@gmail.com>
To: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
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
	(makosoft[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: 1R3vVu-0000h8-Mk
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net, kjj <kjj@jerviss.org>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Difficulty adjustment / time issues
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, 14 Sep 2011 19:52:55 -0000

On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com> wrote:
> Modify the getwork code to build on the second-from-tip block if the
> first-on-tip block is on the discouraged list.
>
> 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.
Of course, if only a small percentage of mining power adopts this
scheme, everyone that does so will presumably be harming themselves by
doing so since they're essentially increasing the odds that the next
block they mine will become invalid...