Author: Keagan McClelland 2021-05-17 17:28:39
Published on: 2021-05-17T17:28:39+00:00
The idea of making transactions only mineable by miners who follow a particular practice has been discussed. However, implementing this would require an unbounded number of optional certificates in transactions, which is not possible as transaction sizes cannot be unbounded due to the risk of denial of service attacks on the network. Additionally, the proposal would require a large consensus change to implement and is unlikely to gain necessary support. Instead, users can submit their transactions via an overlay network directly to miners that fit their criteria. This can be implemented in upper layers but may cause delays in transaction processing, potentially leading to business partners choosing not to do business with them in the future. A discussion on green miner certification was held, with some proposing miner certification based on 'green status.' However, this proposal was met with criticism for being a form of centralization. The proposer clarified that the only thing they suggested was to introduce an option to encrypt transactions in the mempool to allow users some control over who mines their transaction. Such functionality could have uses beyond 'green miners,' such as steering transactions away from large mining pools to support small independent miners. Voluntary carbon offset markets are growing fast, but environmental concerns are still disputed by some members of the community. The thread ends with a call for open discussion without dismissiveness.
Updated on: 2023-06-14T21:53:45.706484+00:00