Author: Filippo Merli 2021-09-11 07:54:58
Published on: 2021-09-11T07:54:58+00:00
The discussion is centered around a proposal that rewards miners for creating valid blocks, with the main concern being that a rogue miner could avoid referencing other miners' shares to keep the rewards for themselves, rendering the pool unprofitable for good miners. The issue of resolving conflicts between conflicting versions of the DAG is also raised, with two methods proposed: using either the longest chain or the one with more work. However, both methods present issues, including the possibility of a bad hasher creating many low-difficulty shares and then using their real hashrate to mine and publish higher-difficulty shares without sharing the reward, or a miner that has published shares choosing to not share the reward for a block that alone has more total work than all of their previous shares combined. ZmnSCPxj suggests that in the Braidpool system, every share can reference multiple previous shares, so a good hasher will refer not only to their own shares but also to those of a "bad" hasher. Honest hashers will base their decisions on the share that refers to the most total work rather than a single chain. Therefore, even if a bad hasher creates multiple low-difficulty shares, a good hasher will still refer to them along with their own shares, and a share like GOOD3 that refers to more shares will be considered weightier and win out over a share like BAD3 that refers to fewer shares.
Updated on: 2023-06-15T01:18:15.968132+00:00