[Bitcoin-development] Punishing empty blocks?

[Luke-Jr]

On Friday, May 25, 2012 12:51:09 AM Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 8:45 PM, Luke-Jr <luke at dashjr.org> wrote:
> > On Thursday, May 24, 2012 4:33:12 PM Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >> Comments?  It wouldn't be a problem if these no-TX blocks were not
> >> already getting frequent (1 in 20).
> > 
> > FWIW, based on statistics for Eligius's past 100 blocks, it seems 10% (1
> > in 10) of 1-txn blocks is not actually unreasonable. This also means
> > these 1-txn mined blocks are not necessarily harming Bitcoin
> > intentionally. Anyone care to figure out the math for how fast miners
> > need to finish processing transactions to reduce the number of 1txn
> > blocks?
> 
> Look at the time since last block, and correlate with the number of
> non-spam TX's in the memory pool at the time.  It is obvious which
> ones are quick blocks (<60 seconds since last block, no big deal) and
> which ones are the lazy miners (> 120 seconds since last block).

Block times are not accurate enough for that.