Published on: 2017-07-05T14:02:08+00:00
The proposal to split the Bitcoin network into two or three blockchains in order to increase its capacity has sparked controversy and is seen as risky, according to John Hardy's post on the bitcoin-dev mailing list. Hardy suggests that this may be an exercise in game theory to test theories. He also recommends finding a simple and robust difficulty adjustment that occurs every block, rather than the current system of every 2016 blocks.Hardy introduces Mining Reactive Proof of Work Addition (MR POWA) as a method to respond to mining behavior on a blockchain. In the case of BIP148, the activation criterion would be when a non-BIP148 compliant chain is detected 144 blocks ahead of a BIP148 compliant chain. This would trigger a change in consensus rules, resulting in a hard fork to lower the difficulty for the existing proof of work method and introduce a second proof of work method such as Scrypt or Ethash. The goal is to ensure SegWit activation and put more pressure on miners to follow the BIP148 chain.However, there is a potential downside to this approach as it could permanently split the network. On the upside, BIP148 miners would no longer need to "hold their nerve" as they would have a guaranteed viable chain and be rewarded for their early support. To counter attacks from the other chain, the MR POWA method would require alternating proof of work methods.This idea is highly contentious and would ideally be implemented through a grassroots movement similar to BIP148. Those already running a BIP148 node could easily run a BIP148 + MR POWA node. The hope is that this would force miners to follow the BIP148 chain, rendering the additional code unnecessary. However, careful evaluation and consideration of potential outcomes are crucial before implementing this plan, as it is based on pure game theory.
Updated on: 2023-08-01T21:16:45.581024+00:00