📅 Original date posted:2015-08-21
📝 Original message:Hector,
I can only say 2 things in the brief time I have now:
1. There is a solution that I proposed for proving you own a copy of the
block-chain. It's using aymmetric-time functions:
https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2014/11/03/proof-of-local-blockchain-storage/
2. I'm finishing a paper on a transaction system (DAGCoin) which relies on
proof-of-work per transactions, and no per blocks. Actually it has no
blocks.
This has been explored in the past, but I came up with some basic ideas
that make this work a few months ago. I will forward a draft to you while
at the same time I try to analyze your proposal. Or I may publish the draft
altogether.
Best regards,
Sergio
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 5:50 PM, Tamas Blummer via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Jameson,
>
> I like your thinking about the implicit reward of full nodes. It was not
> perceived as sufficient by many, hence full node counts were falling.
>
> This might reverse now as the implicit value of validating yourself
> however becomes higher in a heterogenous environment, that is if there are
> hard forks in the wild.
>
> Actually pooled mining became an option through the homogenous nature of
> the network.
>
> Tamas Blummer
>
> On Aug 19, 2015, at 13:42, Jameson Lopp via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> The incentives for running a node may not be obvious to the average user,
> but they are there. Rather than direct monetary incentives, they are
> indirect. For one, it allows you to have a local copy of the blockchain
> that you validated yourself - trustlessness is the entire point of this
> system. Having local self-validated blockchain data is also essential for
> any enterprise that needs to quickly access large volumes of it. The other
> incentive is it supports the network. Users may feel that this is necessary
> out of altruism or they may feel incentivized to protect their investments
> in Bitcoin.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150821/842df401/attachment-0001.html>;
Sergio Demian Lerner [ARCHIVE] /
npub1fv…3vq7f
2023-06-07 17:37:10
in reply to nevent1q…gyx4
Author Public Key
npub1fvuxqdqg7klqqgy3yy8gdxjv4phu92sll5y8zqm2qe5qdrhxymhqf3vq7fPublished at
2023-06-07 17:37:10Event JSON
{
"id": "ba0d7d964b8e593ffd4e382dbe67f7a971de95757ec83906bc18d7297d3dd4f3",
"pubkey": "4b38603408f5be002091210e869a4ca86fc2aa1ffd0871036a0668068ee626ee",
"created_at": 1686159430,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"43534b11c777af4aee64dd3c19f6a3d3ba99802fc0753b2ed069ff28900d38e6",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"14377da2ac08813b842aa47a6fb997082ec47aa25726383e6da2729ccd3dd78f",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"c632841665fccdabf021322b1d969539c9c1f829ceed38844fea24e8512962d7"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-08-21\n📝 Original message:Hector,\n I can only say 2 things in the brief time I have now:\n\n1. There is a solution that I proposed for proving you own a copy of the\nblock-chain. It's using aymmetric-time functions:\n\nhttps://bitslog.wordpress.com/2014/11/03/proof-of-local-blockchain-storage/\n\n2. I'm finishing a paper on a transaction system (DAGCoin) which relies on\nproof-of-work per transactions, and no per blocks. Actually it has no\nblocks.\n\nThis has been explored in the past, but I came up with some basic ideas\nthat make this work a few months ago. I will forward a draft to you while\nat the same time I try to analyze your proposal. Or I may publish the draft\naltogether.\n\nBest regards,\n Sergio\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOn Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 5:50 PM, Tamas Blummer via bitcoin-dev \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e Jameson,\n\u003e\n\u003e I like your thinking about the implicit reward of full nodes. It was not\n\u003e perceived as sufficient by many, hence full node counts were falling.\n\u003e\n\u003e This might reverse now as the implicit value of validating yourself\n\u003e however becomes higher in a heterogenous environment, that is if there are\n\u003e hard forks in the wild.\n\u003e\n\u003e Actually pooled mining became an option through the homogenous nature of\n\u003e the network.\n\u003e\n\u003e Tamas Blummer\n\u003e\n\u003e On Aug 19, 2015, at 13:42, Jameson Lopp via bitcoin-dev \u003c\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e The incentives for running a node may not be obvious to the average user,\n\u003e but they are there. Rather than direct monetary incentives, they are\n\u003e indirect. For one, it allows you to have a local copy of the blockchain\n\u003e that you validated yourself - trustlessness is the entire point of this\n\u003e system. Having local self-validated blockchain data is also essential for\n\u003e any enterprise that needs to quickly access large volumes of it. The other\n\u003e incentive is it supports the network. Users may feel that this is necessary\n\u003e out of altruism or they may feel incentivized to protect their investments\n\u003e in Bitcoin.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150821/842df401/attachment-0001.html\u003e",
"sig": "2b003c351319810ebf714dd46c7e1f6aa724056be721aae6937fc94618387ba30ff307fc8cc4e9f9c22c2e0c0f1b43dcdff9297b6a397ae57c270e28ba72014e"
}