Author: email at yancy.lol 2022-10-20 19:21:58
Published on: 2022-10-20T19:21:58+00:00
In this discussion on the bitcoin-dev mailing list, there are multiple topics being discussed. One idea that is brought up is the distinction between "not tip mining" and actively being a bad actor by changing a past transaction signed by oneself. The original post includes a quote from Satoshi's whitepaper about an attacker generating an alternate chain faster than the honest chain, but even if accomplished, it does not throw the system open to arbitrary changes. Nodes will not accept invalid transactions as payment, and honest nodes will never accept a block containing them. The conversation then shifts to the importance of the "social contract" of what Bitcoin is, which is described in the whitepaper. However, there is debate over whether the "honest" majority (i.e. rule-following) should be accepted as an axiom or if the rules need to be incentive-compatible for the system to be functional. There is concern about the stability of mining in a low subsidy environment and the incentives to mine on the most work chain, but the current understanding is that with a "thick mempool" and/or miners rationally leaving behind transactions to encourage mining on their block, mining will be stable. Overall, the discussion touches on various aspects of Bitcoin such as security, game theory, incentives, and mining stability. Links to a Github repository and Twitter account are also provided.
Updated on: 2023-06-16T01:53:39.098737+00:00