Author: Mike Brooks 2020-09-30 23:53:25
Published on: 2020-09-30T23:53:25+00:00
The email thread discusses the growing disagreement in mining capacity and ambiguity in disagreement, which needs to be addressed to achieve complete consensus. The author mentions an exploitable condition and states that their three-block plan does not add up. They also mention the security fundamentals that drive the necessity for the solution. The author talks about their expertise in cryptography and mentions the time they hacked Square Inc. ethically. The exploit described in the paper was delivered to the Bitcoin-core security team on August 4 at 9:36 PM PST, and the industry standard of 90 days gives until November 2nd. ZmnSCPxj, in their response, observes that the current "first seen" is more incentive-compatible than floating-point Nakamoto consensus. They doubt the adoption of floating-point Nakamoto consensus as it is not incentive-compatible. They suggest waiting for 3 confirmations instead of just 1 confirmation to fix the stability issues. The email concludes by stating that a wise designer of automated systems will still wait for 3 confirmations before doing anything, and by then, the effects of floating-point Nakamoto consensus will be a thing of the past.
Updated on: 2023-06-14T15:36:24.200082+00:00