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
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
|
Return-Path: <pete@petertodd.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 34715122A
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 1 Sep 2015 07:56:22 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from outmail149077.authsmtp.com (outmail149077.authsmtp.com
[62.13.149.77])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62BC0A8
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 1 Sep 2015 07:56:21 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-c237.authsmtp.com (mail-c237.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.237])
by punt15.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t817uIGx074688;
Tue, 1 Sep 2015 08:56:18 +0100 (BST)
Received: from muck (030-098.web.ny.np1.net [64.61.30.98] (may be forged))
(authenticated bits=128)
by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t817uEQ9072497
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
Tue, 1 Sep 2015 08:56:16 +0100 (BST)
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 03:56:14 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Daniele Pinna <daniele.pinna@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20150901075613.GD17380@muck>
References: <CAEgR2PE35K6kt1sZ0iDu2Y9vv+6+Omgg_n4n3gtMggYuE3YD-g@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="GyRA7555PLgSTuth"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAEgR2PE35K6kt1sZ0iDu2Y9vv+6+Omgg_n4n3gtMggYuE3YD-g@mail.gmail.com>
X-Server-Quench: ecb0aaa1-507e-11e5-9f76-002590a135d3
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
aAdMdgMUC1AEAgsB AmMbW1xeVVt7WGQ7 bQ5PawRDYUpQVg11
VUBOXVMcUA1pBll0 ZxceVRt2fgIIf3l5 bQg3DSJbDRUrdFt4
QkkBCGwHMGJ9YTYY Vl1YdwFReQMbfxxA PlMxNiYHcQ5VPz4z
GA41ejw8IwAXBR5v az0kZXk1e3wqMRN0 BFg5HTI1AQU5Ryg0 NREjQl4B
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1024:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 64.61.30.98/587
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
anti-virus system.
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,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@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] ERRATA CORRIGE + Short Theorem
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: Tue, 01 Sep 2015 07:56:22 -0000
--GyRA7555PLgSTuth
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 10:01:00PM +0200, Daniele Pinna via bitcoin-dev wro=
te:
> Since my longer post seems to be caught in moderator purgatory I will
> rehash its results into this much smaller message. I apologize for the
> spamming.
>=20
> I present a theorem whose thesis is obvious to many.
>=20
> *THESIS: All hashrates* *h' > h generate a revenue per unit of hash v' >
> v. *
>=20
> Let us absurdly[1] assume that an optimal hashrate *h* exists where the
> average revenue for each hash in service is maximized. This will result
> from perpetually mining blocks of size *q,* is *v. *All larger hashrates =
*h'
> > h* will generate an average revenue per hash *v' < v*(effectively the
> conclusion of my paper) due to the higher orphan risk carried from having
> to mine blocks of size *q' > q*. Leading from Peter's model and my
> analysis, the origin of this balance lies in the fact that larger miners
> must somehow be forced to mine larger blocks which in turn carry a larger
> orphan risk.
>=20
> What happens if a large miner *h'* chooses not to mine his optimal block
> size *q' *in favor of a seemingly "sub-optimal" block size* q*?
> Since he mines a block of identical size as the smaller miner, they will
> both carry identical orphan risks[2], and win identical
> amounts*R+M(q)* whenever
> they successfully mine a block. Since the larger miner can statistically
> expect to win *h'/h* more blocks than the smaller miner, they will each
> earn an identical revenue per unit of hash *R+M(q)/h*.
>=20
> This however directly contradicts the assumption that an optimal hashrate
> exists beyond which the revenue per unit of hash *v' < v*if *h' > h. *
> *Q.E.D *
>=20
> This theorem in turn implies the following corollary:
>=20
> *COROLLARY: **The marginal profit curve is a monotonically increasing of
> miner hashrate.*
>=20
> This simple theorem, suggested implicitly by Gmaxwell disproves any and a=
ll
> conclusions of my work. Most importantly, centralization pressures will
> always be present.
FWIW I did a quick math proof along those lines awhile back too using
some basic first-year math, again proving that larger miners earn more
money per unit hashing power:
http://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg03=
272.html
--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
000000000000000010b552c5f5c18705ccb1b21c550c08872089f89076840d6d
--GyRA7555PLgSTuth
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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==
=SUjN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--GyRA7555PLgSTuth--
|
