Author: Peter Todd 2015-06-19 14:08:15
Published on: 2015-06-19T14:08:15+00:00
The conversation is about centralized mining and zeroconf transactions. The contracts will drive centralization of mining as only the larger non-anonymous players have the ability to enter such contracts. Merchant service providers are trying to get hashing power contracts with mining pools for guaranteed transaction acceptance, which is a serious concern as it drives further centralization. Coinbase does not currently have any contracts in place or plans to do so but relies heavily on zeroconf transactions for merchant processing. If any significant portion of the mining pools started running an unsafe RBF patch, they would need to look into contracts as a way to prevent fraud. There are concerns about double-spends happening due to Sybil attacking pools or other changes that reduce the reliability of transaction confirmations. The higher demands on bandwidth of higher block sizes will inevitably reduce the synchronicity of mempools, resulting in double-spend opportunities and many proposals to limit mempool size allow zeroconf double-spends.
Updated on: 2023-06-09T23:43:13.488080+00:00