My apologies for posting to the wrong thread.
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 5:51 PM, Emin Gün Sirer
wrote:
> I thought I'd chime in and point out some research results that might help.
> Even if they don't, there is a cool underlying technique that some of you
> might find interesting.
>
> The probl
I thought I'd chime in and point out some research results that might help.
Even if they don't, there is a cool underlying technique that some of you
might find interesting.
The problem being tackled here is very similar to "set reconciliation,"
where
peer A thinks that the set of transactions tha
Yes. That, and several other things. If you can figure out how to
propagate a block without re-propagating all the transactions everyone
already has, you address the large-blocks-slower-to-relay problem, and
additionally create an incentive for miners to mine blocks consisting
of publicly broadca
Before they got traction, yes. But he projected a bit, as anyone
could, to see the trend.
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 1:22 PM, slush wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 6:14 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>
>> Historical note: On one hand, Satoshi seemed to dislike the early
>> emergence of GPU mining poo
Oops, sorry, I see the subject line changed. This is what I get for working
down the thread list top to bottom :)
I think the best path forward now is to finish off getblocktemplate support
in the various tools so it's possible to pool for payout purposes without
giving up control of block creatio
Jeff, I think the message you're replying to got clipped.
Satoshi's only comment AFAIK on the topic of GPU mining was to wish for a
gentlemen's agreement to postpone it as long as possible, to help make sure
the distribution of coins was as even as possible. Indeed this predated
pooled mining.
---
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 6:14 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Historical note: On one hand, Satoshi seemed to dislike the early
> emergence of GPU mining pools quite a bit.
>
To my knowledge, Satoshi left the project before mining pools got a
traction.
slush
---
Define acceptable. The 40% thing is marketing and a temporary
solution. And people come down on both sides of whether or not
marketing "40%" is a good idea.
I think it is a baby step that is moving in the right direction. You
want the numbers and sentiment moving in that direction (down, versus
8 matches
Mail list logo
