I think you're making a number of assumptions about mining that are not accurate.
> First of all, how much chance in finding next block the corrupted miners > have? One percent of all Bitcoin hash powers? Or maximum 5 percent or 10? The > cheaters must come up in dividing that 1.2 Bitcoin between. After all the > risk/reward must fit them. They can not be a big mining pool since there is > no benefit, so they will be small miners with low hash rate. If they solve > the puzzle and broadcast the block, no one in the entire Bitcoin network has > block transactions or seen it before in their mempool! You're making the assumption that miners won't build on top of a block with transactions they have not seen before or transactions that may contain double spends of unconfirmed inputs, this is not how mining works, as long as the block passes the consensus rules effectively all miners will mine on top of it by default, this behavior is fundamental to how mining currently works and is fairly deeply baked into the current mining infrastructure. > Will they accept this block? In theory it is possible and have 0.01 percent > chance but we can eliminate this small possibilities by a simple BIP for > miners. What would this BIP look like? I don't see how this could work in a decentralized way as you would need another way of reaching consensus on what defines a valid block. Right now the chance is nearly 100 percent that a miner will mine on top of the latest valid block, many pools(most last I checked) will even mine on the next block before they validate the latest block fully(ie validationless mining) to reduce their orphan rates. > We suppose the miners always control transactions with doc-watchers and avoid > accepting transaction with same UTXO but different output. Miners have different mempool policy/rules for what transactions they themselves mine but all miners must mine on the most work chain of valid blocks otherwise they risk their own blocks being orphaned, any miner that does not do this is effectively guaranteed to have their block orphaned right now. > Because of high Bitcoin transaction fee, this guarantee transaction will take > place in next block, even if other transaction which are using the same UTXO > as input existed in mempool. When a new transaction is broadcast miners do not immediately start mining on a block template that includes that transaction, the template won't even be generated immediately when it enters a miners mempool in practice, for bandwidth/network efficiency reasons mining pools batch update the stratum templates/jobs they mine against so there can be significant latency between the time a transaction is actually broadcast and hits the miners mempool and the time the miners actually switch to mining on top it, these batched updates are essentially like point in time snapshots of the mempool and typically remain valid(as in the pool will accept shares submitted against that job as valid) until the bitcoin network finds the next block. I don't think these batch updates are done more often than every 30 seconds typically, while often it is on the order of multiple minutes depending on the pool. Regards, James On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 2:14 PM raymo via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > Hi, > I have a proposal for improve Bitcoin TPS and privacy, here is the post. > https://raymo-49157.medium.com/time-to-boost-bitcoin-circulation-million-transactions-per-second-and-privacy-1eef8568d180 > https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5344020.0 > Can you please read it and share your idea about it. > > Cheers > Raymo > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
