Author: Jeremy 2021-04-16 21:24:30
Published on: 2021-04-16T21:24:30+00:00
In a recent discussion on the bitcoin-dev mailing list, Erik Aronesty proposed the idea of transitioning from proof-of-work (PoW) to proof-of-burn (PoB) in a soft fork. Aronesty made three assumptions: that there exists a PoB model that accurately reflects the investment and development of ASICs for miner incentive, that the timing problem of keeping blocks 10 minutes apart is solvable, and that everyone unanimously loves the idea. The proposed transition would involve validating nodes requiring PoB in addition to PoW in a soft fork, which would make mining more expensive and lead to a gradual drop in PoW usage. Eventually, PoB would be required at 100% of the "required work" to mine on a predefined schedule. Aronesty believes that a hard fork would not be necessary, as the transition could be made in a back-compatible way.However, one potential issue raised in response to the proposal was the fact that not all miners may be willing to switch to PoB, which could cause problems if a minority of miners continue to use PoW. Another concern was the possibility of one miner turning on an S9 and ramping up difficulty for everyone else. Some suggested that hard deprecation of PoW may be necessary for the proposal to work effectively.
Updated on: 2023-06-14T20:16:36.383780+00:00