Author: jl2012 at xbt.hk 2015-09-03 04:55:35
Published on: 2015-09-03T04:55:35+00:00
In a Bitcoin-dev mailing list post, Jeff Garzik warns against schemes proposing to pay with difficulty/hashpower to change block size. He believes that such proposals would require out-of-band collusion to change block size and/or require miners to have idle hashpower on hand to change block size which is unrealistic and potentially corrosive. Introducing these concepts potentially makes the block size and therefore fee market too close and sensitive to the wild vagaries of the mining chip market. Instead, Garzik suggests researching pay-to-future-miner which has neutral forward-looking incentives. Garzik had previously explained why pay with difficulty was bad for everyone: miners and users, and described the use of OP_CLTV for pay-to-future-miner. However, the general problem with pay-to-increase-block-size scheme is that it indirectly sets a minimal transaction fee, which could be difficult and arbitrary, and is against competition.
Updated on: 2023-06-10T21:59:05.282606+00:00