Author: Adam Back 2013-05-13 10:54:08
Published on: 2013-05-13T10:54:08+00:00
In May 2013, an email conversation between John Dillon and Peter Todd regarding merge-mining was published. The protocol for merge-mining ensures the value of the miner is not given away in an 'anyone-can-spend' output. There are three options for miners: merged-mine, destroy bitcoin, or anyone-can-spend. For option three, it’s difficult to ensure that you will be spending the mined bitcoin as soon as possible, so it devolves to merged-mine. Peter talks about value, but the proof only proves a cost equal to bitcoin, which is different from value. Publicly auditable pooled mining protocols may be a starting point for respendable micropayments. These pools can be used to prove to each other outside of the bitcoin transaction log that shares were contributed to a block, which can then be traded. If payments are low value, people may be happy trusting a pool. If the pool cheats, everyone stops using the pool. Probabilistic micro-payments are not what Peter Todd’s talking about; it's Rivest's peppercoin. Merge-mining Bitcoin and hashcash could benefit the recipient in a way that scales to email without installing a bitcoin client. Blockchain header data is widely distributed and instantly verifiable, making it a kind of trapdoor hashchain. Cypherspace.org suggests numerous competing hierarchical, heavily cached yet publicly auditable approaches to naming systems, with cheaters being shunned.
Updated on: 2023-06-06T16:43:54.166333+00:00