📅 Original date posted:2015-07-31
📝 Original message:On Thursday 30. July 2015 11.02.43 Mark Friedenbach wrote:
> It is possible for a decentralized system like bitcoin to scale via
> distribution in a way that introduces minimal trust, for example by
> probabilistic validation and distribution of fraud proofs. However changes
> to bitcoin consensus rules (mostly soft-forks) are required in order to
> make this possible.
Sounds overly complicated...
What about a much simpler solution where the miner has a CPU in a well
connected data center. Say, Amsterdam.
He runs bitcoind on there and he, in China or such, connects to it over RPC
(and ssl) to get a "block 000f00" accepted signal. Which would be 100 bytes or
so.
The miner continues to use his current setup, but with actual validation of
the blocks to completely eliminate the risk of mining on orphaned blocks and
at the same time remove most of the cost of larger-than-average bandwidth in
his country.
A slightly more complicated solution is needed to allow the miner to only send
the headers to the bitcoind instance. So he only sends a couple of kb and his
datacenter machine does the actual propagation.
If the risk of duplication becomes an issue, setup multiple propagating nodes
on different sides of the world.
Bottom line for me is that most of the innovation for making stuff better for
miners should be done in miners-specific software. Not in end-user software
like bitcoin-core.
--
Thomas Zander
Thomas Zander [ARCHIVE] /
npub1du…vyg93
2023-06-07 15:44:03
in reply to nevent1q…v8d3
Author Public Key
npub1du3xh5wgds32a5fweqkd9k45kh30wl7kv2kyu8ugz9c2ztdg00tqqvyg93Published at
2023-06-07 15:44:03Event JSON
{
"id": "e5a3a8f8a6835e4eceba8fe99c21b9d020dc5cf2dd1b1bafe7ee2f44dec0a146",
"pubkey": "6f226bd1c86c22aed12ec82cd2dab4b5e2f77fd662ac4e1f881170a12da87bd6",
"created_at": 1686152643,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"6c35032431244726c153d1a10f0c8b9388f3e47774968a06a7b1ffa60bbaccd9",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"8bec40290d9de37bf0ce6b1180541c5b387b10c81b45c7b2938006d95f2baf20",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"1c61d995949cbfaf14f767784e166bde865c7b8783d7aa3bf0a1d014b70c0069"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-07-31\n📝 Original message:On Thursday 30. July 2015 11.02.43 Mark Friedenbach wrote:\n\u003e It is possible for a decentralized system like bitcoin to scale via\n\u003e distribution in a way that introduces minimal trust, for example by\n\u003e probabilistic validation and distribution of fraud proofs. However changes\n\u003e to bitcoin consensus rules (mostly soft-forks) are required in order to\n\u003e make this possible.\n\nSounds overly complicated...\n\nWhat about a much simpler solution where the miner has a CPU in a well \nconnected data center. Say, Amsterdam.\nHe runs bitcoind on there and he, in China or such, connects to it over RPC \n(and ssl) to get a \"block 000f00\" accepted signal. Which would be 100 bytes or \nso.\n\nThe miner continues to use his current setup, but with actual validation of \nthe blocks to completely eliminate the risk of mining on orphaned blocks and \nat the same time remove most of the cost of larger-than-average bandwidth in \nhis country.\n\nA slightly more complicated solution is needed to allow the miner to only send \nthe headers to the bitcoind instance. So he only sends a couple of kb and his \ndatacenter machine does the actual propagation.\n\nIf the risk of duplication becomes an issue, setup multiple propagating nodes \non different sides of the world.\n\nBottom line for me is that most of the innovation for making stuff better for \nminers should be done in miners-specific software. Not in end-user software \nlike bitcoin-core.\n\n-- \nThomas Zander",
"sig": "c904c0f7f3452d8864462c3dde1be3144466902a5af9c5d4e771dbc4be1bdf0102d4a0b03cef6ea010e4c1a4ecc725335e35c45626aa1573c265016ee5e5216b"
}