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
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <pw@vps7135.xlshosting.net>) id 1UySBR-0003uQ-9B
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:42:13 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from vps7135.xlshosting.net ([178.18.90.41])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1UySBP-0001rt-IM for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:42:13 +0000
Received: by vps7135.xlshosting.net (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 1EF6C33CB93; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 21:42:06 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 21:42:06 +0200
From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
To: Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org>
Message-ID: <20130714194205.GA27202@vps7135.xlshosting.net>
References: <20130705140140.GA23949@netbook.cypherspace.org>
<CAC1+kJMyvKnUKm8xTjzUK_5iq_VZM=iX17aCCd9vqe7jsYUJfQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAPaL=UVmr1zng6QtngkY-Y+fP+E67NST7MYRpkSHfjtwZ7PFNw@mail.gmail.com>
<201307141933.13754.luke@dashjr.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <201307141933.13754.luke@dashjr.org>
X-PGP-Key: http://sipa.ulyssis.org/pubkey.asc
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(pieter.wuille[at]gmail.com)
0.0 DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED No valid author signature, adsp_override is
CUSTOM_MED
-0.4 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain 1.2 NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED ADSP custom_med hit,
and not from a mailing list
X-Headers-End: 1UySBP-0001rt-IM
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net, Jorge@vps7135.xlshosting.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] libzerocoin released,
what about a zerocoin-only alt-coin with either-or mining
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:42:13 -0000
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 07:33:06PM +0000, Luke-Jr wrote:
> > The issue is that unless there is a cost to mining a *invalid* block
> > the merge mined coin has little protection from miners who mine invalid
> > blocks, either maliciously or through negligence. If the coin isn't worth
> > much, either because it's market value is low or the worth is negative to
> > the malicious miner, your theories of value have nothing to do with the
> > issue.
>
> Invalid blocks are rejected by validating clients in all circumstances.
I don't think that's what John means.
If you have hash power for the parent chain, mining invalid blocks for the
merge-mined chain costs you nothing. Yes, they will be invalid, but you've
lost nothing.
The basic assumption underlying mining security is that it is more profitable
to collaborate with mining a chain (and profit from the block payout) than to
attack it. In the case of merged mining, this assumption is not valid.
--
Pieter
|
