1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
|
Return-Path: <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A53CFAC
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 11 Sep 2015 16:32:46 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wi0-f178.google.com (mail-wi0-f178.google.com
[209.85.212.178])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BAFFFF2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 11 Sep 2015 16:32:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wiclk2 with SMTP id lk2so70838779wic.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 11 Sep 2015 09:32:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
bh=f70k57NLxeKWCcAGBjzNgq9ZTP4bB38Ex44vCmtNP2Y=;
b=g0dqJ/4wi5vVw4r6TYq8RO/p9FA0z/FJrEtr/SdEZQTEeg6wAwW/81tnBoYZfqKjvW
5D9adk1yb/UWIIBn8iE7okwY0AMMxORgGED6wiyt+V7mA0uzMeEnIVFXbFyAeZHPsnOs
dUQGSLeqwOEaPjEh1u/HOyeDSbdGpHd0N6oyQcz/yK+qczx8h7aAVs0TW8CaQKFdgYra
S3q4pkBfrVgPTK4M6SC2G3sdLpGiVJTTwff3J5VurvZ1nLFqEPQiH2SESnFSzXbi/NVN
++OtCJyO62LuRmr7+HDcu86toMxKoJVWWJBJ2mWw9cmIpSEqUlJyQtpNficjuMehtyBF
0Afg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkyHX8bx/XPtiEN2kdhXPbUq0qE8YKn+oOJzfZBQ5yb9zdlyzcTOdHy6pjRLF93cTjiQ8SN
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.186.98 with SMTP id fj2mr19206385wic.58.1441989164399;
Fri, 11 Sep 2015 09:32:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.37.5 with HTTP; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 09:32:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.37.5 with HTTP; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 09:32:44 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAGLBAhd11-_LNJ-ba6NXmWBXz=yb+pFTmf9tHAgFW_m6S5jnfw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGLBAhd11-_LNJ-ba6NXmWBXz=yb+pFTmf9tHAgFW_m6S5jnfw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 18:32:44 +0200
Message-ID: <CABm2gDpsJdSDTyvTGNSZXX1+UyAHxTB=ODuy6bJvMj3A9BqhqQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
To: Dave Scotese <dscotese@litmocracy.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c263d8ea130d051f7b430b
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Days Destroyed as block selection
heuristic
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 16:32:46 -0000
--001a11c263d8ea130d051f7b430b
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Sep 11, 2015 12:27 PM, "Dave Scotese via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> Rather than (promising to, and when they don't actually, at least
pretending to) use the first-seen block, I propose that a more
sophisticated method of choosing which of two block solutions to accept.
There's already a criterion to chose: the one with more work (in valid
blocks) on top of it.
--001a11c263d8ea130d051f7b430b
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<p dir=3D"ltr"><br>
On Sep 11, 2015 12:27 PM, "Dave Scotese via bitcoin-dev" <<a h=
ref=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linu=
xfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Rather than (promising to, and when they don't actually, at least =
pretending to) use the first-seen block, I propose that a more sophisticate=
d method of choosing which of two block solutions to accept.=C2=A0</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">There's already a criterion to chose: the one with more =
work (in valid blocks) on top of it.</p>
--001a11c263d8ea130d051f7b430b--
|
