<unnamed>

Public Key

npub1s6kl564nallpxservsjs0up8w62ztzlzv06765kzmj85mtscmd0qstds2a

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsgdt06d2e7llsngv3kgfg87qnhd9p9303x8a0d2tpder6d4cvdkhspzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezuamfdejsz9rhwden5te0wfjkccte9ejxzmt4wvhxjmcpp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mqc9asf2

Publishing to

nostr.wine

relay.damus.io

nos.lol

Last Notes

2023-06-07 17:46:56 CEST

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2015-08-14
📝 Original message:Greetings,
a thought occurred to me that I would love to hear what some bitcoin experts think about.
What if one were to adjust the difficulty (for individual blocks) depending on the relative size to the average block size of the previous difficulty period? (I apologize if i’m not using the correct terms, I’m not a real programmer, and I’ve only recently started to subscribe to the mailing list)
In practice:
1. calculate average block size for the previous difficulty period (is it 2016-blocks?)
2. when trying to find a new block adjust the difficulty by adding the relative size difference. For instance, if i’m trying to create a block half (or double) the size of the average block size for the previous difficulty period then my difficulty will be 2x the normal one… if I’m trying to make one that is 30% bigger (or smaller) then the difficulty is 1.3 times the normal one
Right now this would force miners to make blocks as close to 1mb as possible (since the block reward >> fees). But unless I’m mistaken sometime in the future the block size should be adjusted to maximize the fees…
Could the concept be useful somehow?
I apologize if it’s been discussed before or if it’s a stupid idea, I would have run it by some other people, but I’m afraid I don’t know anyone that have any interest in bitcoin.
Regards
/jakob