Author: ZmnSCPxj 2018-04-20 03:43:30
Published on: 2018-04-20T03:43:30+00:00
In a conversation between Tyler and ZmnSCPxj, the former asked about the first script given in "Technical Proposal" and whether it works as a "check proof-of-work" script. ZmnSCPxj expressed uncertainty and questioned whether the "[]" comments were actually pushes of actual data embedded in the script or just comments. ZmnSCPxj also pointed out that OP_CheckLockTimeVerify is absolute time, not relative time, and questioned why blockheight 52560 was chosen in particular. He clarified that he believed this was in 2010 and wondered if Tyler was thinking of OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY, which imposes a relative timelock.Furthermore, ZmnSCPxj suggested that locking funds for a time may be enough without pulling in proof-of-work, especially since the Bitcoin blockchain itself is already proof-of-work. He referenced his own ideas for proof-of-mainstake, where locking funds in the mainchain is used as voting rights for correctness of the sidechain, avoiding normal proof-of-stake problems since the stake that backs the chain is on a separate proof-of-work chain.
Updated on: 2023-05-24T22:56:52.917488+00:00