📅 Original date posted:2021-06-19
📝 Original message:I think you're making a number of assumptions about mining that are
not accurate.
> First of all, how much chance in finding next block the corrupted miners have? One percent of all Bitcoin hash powers? Or maximum 5 percent or 10? The cheaters must come up in dividing that 1.2 Bitcoin between. After all the risk/reward must fit them. They can not be a big mining pool since there is no benefit, so they will be small miners with low hash rate. If they solve the puzzle and broadcast the block, no one in the entire Bitcoin network has block transactions or seen it before in their mempool!
You're making the assumption that miners won't build on top of a block
with transactions they have not seen before or transactions that may
contain double spends of unconfirmed inputs, this is not how mining
works, as long as the block passes the consensus rules effectively all
miners will mine on top of it by default, this behavior is fundamental
to how mining currently works and is fairly deeply baked into the
current mining infrastructure.
> Will they accept this block? In theory it is possible and have 0.01 percent chance but we can eliminate this small possibilities by a simple BIP for miners.
What would this BIP look like? I don't see how this could work in a
decentralized way as you would need another way of reaching consensus
on what defines a valid block. Right now the chance is nearly 100
percent that a miner will mine on top of the latest valid block, many
pools(most last I checked) will even mine on the next block before
they validate the latest block fully(ie validationless mining) to
reduce their orphan rates.
> We suppose the miners always control transactions with doc-watchers and avoid accepting transaction with same UTXO but different output.
Miners have different mempool policy/rules for what transactions they
themselves mine but all miners must mine on the most work chain of
valid blocks otherwise they risk their own blocks being orphaned, any
miner that does not do this is effectively guaranteed to have their
block orphaned right now.
> Because of high Bitcoin transaction fee, this guarantee transaction will take place in next block, even if other transaction which are using the same UTXO as input existed in mempool.
When a new transaction is broadcast miners do not immediately start
mining on a block template that includes that transaction, the
template won't even be generated immediately when it enters a miners
mempool in practice, for bandwidth/network efficiency reasons mining
pools batch update the stratum templates/jobs they mine against so
there can be significant latency between the time a transaction is
actually broadcast and hits the miners mempool and the time the miners
actually switch to mining on top it, these batched updates are
essentially like point in time snapshots of the mempool and typically
remain valid(as in the pool will accept shares submitted against that
job as valid) until the bitcoin network finds the next block. I don't
think these batch updates are done more often than every 30 seconds
typically, while often it is on the order of multiple minutes
depending on the pool.
Regards,
James
On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 2:14 PM raymo via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I have a proposal for improve Bitcoin TPS and privacy, here is the post.
> https://raymo-49157.medium.com/time-to-boost-bitcoin-circulation-million-transactions-per-second-and-privacy-1eef8568d180
> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5344020.0
> Can you please read it and share your idea about it.
>
> Cheers
> Raymo
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
James Hilliard [ARCHIVE] /
npub10r…kgk2d
2023-06-07 22:55:05
in reply to nevent1q…32qh
Author Public Key
npub10r9d6edmnrljk59wsf06zqp494l3qtjpa3w245hy6t5euqxlzw2qdkgk2dPublished at
2023-06-07 22:55:05Event JSON
{
"id": "e9f1ffe98e53a6180fab153517c0ac9535d5af200da5336b6a1bc6869a97f614",
"pubkey": "78cadd65bb98ff2b50ae825fa100352d7f102e41ec5caad2e4d2e99e00df1394",
"created_at": 1686178505,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"3ebd7f928d32c4622a16cd89abc93b788e957c8f9779a11f751efe89917c69af",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"f4ec13f231b31d7d295a4ad60377d15dae6b1d98e79a7fe42d6f9641c4c90e7f",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"aa5cd512f153f77aa335d71793f2cd219569188aedabd7d0239386b17f7728d8"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2021-06-19\n📝 Original message:I think you're making a number of assumptions about mining that are\nnot accurate.\n\n\u003e First of all, how much chance in finding next block the corrupted miners have? One percent of all Bitcoin hash powers? Or maximum 5 percent or 10? The cheaters must come up in dividing that 1.2 Bitcoin between. After all the risk/reward must fit them. They can not be a big mining pool since there is no benefit, so they will be small miners with low hash rate. If they solve the puzzle and broadcast the block, no one in the entire Bitcoin network has block transactions or seen it before in their mempool!\n\nYou're making the assumption that miners won't build on top of a block\nwith transactions they have not seen before or transactions that may\ncontain double spends of unconfirmed inputs, this is not how mining\nworks, as long as the block passes the consensus rules effectively all\nminers will mine on top of it by default, this behavior is fundamental\nto how mining currently works and is fairly deeply baked into the\ncurrent mining infrastructure.\n\n\u003e Will they accept this block? In theory it is possible and have 0.01 percent chance but we can eliminate this small possibilities by a simple BIP for miners.\n\nWhat would this BIP look like? I don't see how this could work in a\ndecentralized way as you would need another way of reaching consensus\non what defines a valid block. Right now the chance is nearly 100\npercent that a miner will mine on top of the latest valid block, many\npools(most last I checked) will even mine on the next block before\nthey validate the latest block fully(ie validationless mining) to\nreduce their orphan rates.\n\n\u003e We suppose the miners always control transactions with doc-watchers and avoid accepting transaction with same UTXO but different output.\n\nMiners have different mempool policy/rules for what transactions they\nthemselves mine but all miners must mine on the most work chain of\nvalid blocks otherwise they risk their own blocks being orphaned, any\nminer that does not do this is effectively guaranteed to have their\nblock orphaned right now.\n\n\u003e Because of high Bitcoin transaction fee, this guarantee transaction will take place in next block, even if other transaction which are using the same UTXO as input existed in mempool.\n\nWhen a new transaction is broadcast miners do not immediately start\nmining on a block template that includes that transaction, the\ntemplate won't even be generated immediately when it enters a miners\nmempool in practice, for bandwidth/network efficiency reasons mining\npools batch update the stratum templates/jobs they mine against so\nthere can be significant latency between the time a transaction is\nactually broadcast and hits the miners mempool and the time the miners\nactually switch to mining on top it, these batched updates are\nessentially like point in time snapshots of the mempool and typically\nremain valid(as in the pool will accept shares submitted against that\njob as valid) until the bitcoin network finds the next block. I don't\nthink these batch updates are done more often than every 30 seconds\ntypically, while often it is on the order of multiple minutes\ndepending on the pool.\n\nRegards,\nJames\n\nOn Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 2:14 PM raymo via bitcoin-dev\n\u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e Hi,\n\u003e I have a proposal for improve Bitcoin TPS and privacy, here is the post.\n\u003e https://raymo-49157.medium.com/time-to-boost-bitcoin-circulation-million-transactions-per-second-and-privacy-1eef8568d180\n\u003e https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5344020.0\n\u003e Can you please read it and share your idea about it.\n\u003e\n\u003e Cheers\n\u003e Raymo\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",
"sig": "7b19d090a1c62fb4bd8d8d50c8a669831eecc6475eef32972a083817b7023a851369ee6eaad1415bd15e2a4b2240bc74991d3fd7614d7e8943a4700f7c71319a"
}