Author: Paul Sztorc 2017-12-12 22:16:47
Published on: 2017-12-12T22:16:47+00:00
In this email conversation between Paul and ZmnSCPxj, many topics related to the drivechain technology and its potential issues are discussed. In response to ZmnSCPxj's concerns about miners colluding and using a strategy of upvoting their own withdrawals and downvoting others in order to undercut their competition, Paul argues that this is unlikely to happen due to the nature of atomic swaps. Atomic swaps allow users to move side-to-main instantly and competitively priced, making it unnecessary for miners to engage in such behavior. The possibility of pools being created or destroyed an unlimited number of times is also addressed by Paul, who argues that the administrator of the pool would be the only one concerned with pool-death, and that pools are just a naturally occurring phenomenon that arise when many different hashers want similar things. ZmnSCPxj further brings up the issue of miners harassing each other using strategy and whether orphaning could be used as a response to spiteful miners. Paul argues that if any miner pursues a spiteful strategy, the victim(s) can respond by orphaning and that the threat of eventual orphaning is sufficient to deter such behavior because the antagonizing group is now its own victim group. Users who move side-to-main via atomic swaps will have no reason to care about this.Finally, Paul discusses the security model of drivechain, which relies on investor disappointment that sidechains are no longer going to be supported. The slow (non-AtomicSwap) withdrawal process is designed to increase security and withstand any attack. If it is secure enough to withstand any attack, then attackers will eventually give up.
Updated on: 2023-06-12T22:31:38.526973+00:00