Author: John Hardy 2017-03-20 21:23:17
Published on: 2017-03-20T21:23:17+00:00
The email thread discusses the possibility of switching Proof-of-Work (PoW) algorithms with a soft fork rather than a hard fork in response to a malicious attempt by hashpower majority to introduce a contentious hard fork. However, it is believed that a hard fork would be more efficient in such an emergency situation. The idea of using multiple PoWs is considered a bad idea and not ideal for decentralization. Instead, introducing new proofs of work that are already established and proven within existing altcoin implementations, such as Scrypt, Ethash, and Equihash, could be positive for decentralization. A hard fork like this could also introduce a block size increase since it makes sense to minimize the number of future hard forks where possible. This method creates a huge risk to any malicious actor trying to abuse their position, and ideally, Malicious miner Reactive Proof of Work Additions (MR POWA) would just serve as a deterrent and never activate. Nodes would be able to upgrade, and MR POWA would be of no economic significance: a vestigial chain immediately abandoned with no miner incentive.
Updated on: 2023-06-11T22:16:02.227367+00:00