Author: Devrandom 2017-11-07 04:38:51
Published on: 2017-11-07T04:38:51+00:00
The proposal being discussed involves a soft-fork introduction of a new Proof of Work (POW) system, which is not considered to be a hard-fork. A hard-fork occurs when non-upgraded nodes reject a block mined and relayed by upgraded nodes, creating a fork that cannot heal regardless of what follows. In contrast, this proposal is a soft-fork with reduced security for non-upgraded nodes, which will heal if the attack has less than 1/2 of the original-POW power in the long term. The cost of such an attack is the cost of a normal "51%" attack, multiplied by the fractional weight of the original POW. The reduction in security is proportional to the reduction in weight of the original POW at the time of attack. The original-POW weight starts at 1.0 and is reduced over a long period of time. The transition curve should be set up so that all nodes upgrade by the time the weight is, say, 0.75. Nodes protecting high economic value would upgrade early. Although some have argued that this proposal is a hard-fork, it is more accurately described as a "pseudo-soft-fork" because after implementation, a chain with less total work than the main chain - but more total SHA256^2 work than the main chain - might be followed by non-supporting clients. This change also has security implications due to increased orphan rates resulting from a decreased block interval. Overall, the proposal aims to introduce a new POW system while reducing the risk of a hard-fork.
Updated on: 2023-06-12T21:55:08.741101+00:00