Author: Jorge Timón 2014-12-30 10:47:46
Published on: 2014-12-30T10:47:46+00:00
In an email conversation between Justus Ranvier and Mike Hearn on December 29, 2014, they discussed the difference between adding inputs to a generation transaction (coinbase) versus pay-to-fee transactions in a block. Ranvier pointed out that if a miner includes pay-to-fee transactions in a block, those fees could be claimed by another miner in case the first miner's block is orphaned. In contrast, inputs to a generation transaction cannot be similarly poached. This difference makes some services possible that would not be safely achievable with pay-to-fee transactions. However, it is unclear what these services are. Mike Hearn questioned the motivation behind allowing miners to pay themselves in this way, noting that he understood the difference between "paying to myself only when I mine the next block" and "offering fees to whoever mines this tx." He was unsure of how this helped with security and future lower subsidies.
Updated on: 2023-06-09T15:10:51.091665+00:00