Here's the conversation I had with Mike that Gregory requested a
link to:
Thanks!
Bad or hacked client devs is indeed a huge, worrying problem.
The official client is addressing this with a system called
gitian, where multiple develop
> Very interesting for you to bring this up. I had a similar idea for a
> totally different use case. Greg recently pointed out an interesting
> dilemma saying that (significantly) larger blocks would lead to
> centralization.
Yeah. I am still unsure that this really holds. Bitcoin moves fast,
but
> Link?
It was a private conversation for some reason.
> I also proposed this on this list (see the response in the tree
> datastructures thread) along with more elaboration on IRC.
Ah OK. I wasn't paying much attention to those threads.
-
On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Mike Hearn wrote:
> d'aniel made a good proposal - having good nodes broadcast
> announcements when they detect a rule that breaks the rules, along
> with a proof that it did so. Checking the proof might be very
Link?
I also proposed this on this list (see the re
Very interesting for you to bring this up. I had a similar idea for a
totally different use case. Greg recently pointed out an interesting
dilemma saying that (significantly) larger blocks would lead to
centralization. So I've been working on a design for a decentralized
pool that can handle gigaby
I've been having a discussion with d'aniel from the forums about how
to handle the possibility of a majority-miner conspiracy to raise
inflation, if most economic actors use SPV clients.
Because of how blocks are formatted you cannot check the coinbase of a
transaction without knowing the fees in
6 matches
Mail list logo
