[bitcoin-dev] Dynamically Controlled Bitcoin Block Size Max Cap
jtimon at jtimon.cc
Sat Aug 22 03:21:22 UTC 2015
Don't you mean profits instead of revenue?
On Aug 21, 2015 5:01 PM, "Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 04:16:39PM -0700, Tom Harding wrote:
> > On 8/21/2015 3:21 PM, Peter Todd wrote:
> > > To use a car analogy, Pieter Wuille has shown that the brake cylinders
> > > have a fatigue problem, and if used in stop-and-go traffic regularly
> > > they'll fail during heavy braking, potentially killing someone. You've
> > > countered with a study of highway driving, showing that if the car is
> > > only used on the highway the brakes have no issues, claiming that the
> > > car design is perfectly safe.
> > No. If we must play the analogy game, it was found that the car crashes
> > when the brakes are bad (minority hash power partitioned) the radio is
> > on (partitioned miners had small individual hashrate).
> > I checked the scenario where only the radio is on, and found the car
> > does not crash.
> Incidentally, what's your acceptable revenue difference between a small
> (1% hashing power) and large (%30 hashing power) miner, all else being
> equal? (remember that we shouldn't preclude variance reduction
> techniques such as p2pool and pooled-solo mode)
> Equally, what kind of attacks on miners do you think we need to be able to
> resist? E.g. DoS attacks, hacking, etc.
> That would let me know if you're definition of "the brakes are bad"
> corresponds to normal usage, or something that's not reasonable to
> design for.
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the bitcoin-dev