Published on: 2017-11-11T19:51:04+00:00
In a recent discussion on the bitcoin-dev mailing list, a proposal was made to introduce a new Proof of Work (POW) system through a soft-fork. However, some participants argued that it should be considered a "pseudo-soft-fork" due to its different security model. The proposed change involves introducing auxiliary POW blocks between normal blocks, with each aux-POW block pointing to the previous normal block and containing transactions like a normal block. Each normal block would also have to point to the previous aux-POW block and contain all transactions from that block.The proposal aims to mitigate centralization pressures and reduce the impact of mining power fluctuations by introducing an intermediary confirmation point. This would allow cooperative miners to migrate over time and prevent economies of scale. The new POW system would be gradually transitioned over a period of 1-3 years, giving nodes ample time to upgrade after the fork activates. However, it is important to note that non-upgraded nodes may end up on the wrong chain during an attack, making this change a semi-hard fork.There are also security implications to consider, such as increased orphan rates resulting from decreased block intervals. Some participants argue that the orphan rate would remain unchanged since the total transaction rate and block size would remain the same. However, others point out that the expected time to find each type of block would be halved, leading to a doubling of the orphan rate.Experts like Peter Todd and Paul Sztorc have reviewed the proposal and provided valuable insights. Todd argues that the proposal should be called a "pseudo-soft-fork" due to its different security model, while Sztorc agrees with Todd's comments. The discussion also touches on the choice of a suitable POW, potential pitfalls including botnet mining and unexpected optimizations, and the need for deep analysis.Overall, the proposal aims to introduce a new POW system while reducing the risk of a hard-fork. It acknowledges the challenges and potential drawbacks but offers a less disruptive approach by allowing for gradual transitions. Further evaluation and analysis are needed to determine the feasibility and effectiveness of this proposed change.
Updated on: 2023-08-01T22:05:29.659796+00:00