[Bitcoin-development] Punishing empty blocks?

Alan Reiner etotheipi at gmail.com
Fri May 25 13:44:34 UTC 2012


I like the concept except that it only works if every node connected to the
miner enforces the rule (if it works).  Once any one of the nodes forwards
the block,  other nodes see it coming from a node that can pass the
challenge.

I don't think any solution based on node queries will succeed,  especially
if it requires spontaneous super-majority-of-nodes acceptance.  I think
it's gotta be based on the block itself and each nodes' own info.

If you could spontaneously get all miners to agree not to build off of
anti-social blocks (however that is defined) ,  it would have a chance of
making a difference,  but individual miners would have an advantage
building off the antisocial block because they only need to produce one to
create the longest chain (and collect reward) while the miners following
the rules need two blocks.

--Sent from my overpriced smartphone
On May 25, 2012 3:48 AM, "Christian Decker" <decker.christian at gmail.com>
wrote:

> How about a simple proof of work test? This one though does not ask for
> CPU work but asks the miner for a random old transaction. If the miner
> really stores the entire blockchain he will not have any problem answering
> to that getdata request, whereas a botnet would have to ask someone else
> for it, which could be detected if the response time deviates too much from
> what has been previously measured (compare it against getdata for the block
> they advertise). It's not perfect but it allows an estimate of whether it
> is a chainless miner.
>
> Regards,
> Chris
> --
> Christian Decker
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 3:17 AM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik at exmulti.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 8:57 PM, Luke-Jr <luke at dashjr.org> wrote:
>> > Block times are not accurate enough for that.
>>
>> The times in your log are very accurate, assuming your system clock is
>> remotely accurate.
>>
>> --
>> Jeff Garzik
>> exMULTI, Inc.
>> jgarzik at exmulti.com
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Live Security Virtual Conference
>> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
>> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
>> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
>> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Live Security Virtual Conference
> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20120525/856b88ab/attachment.html>


More information about the bitcoin-dev mailing list