{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1nxlvf9mj3jzgue25n5d9y47s3h5hvg0ded9hwpejdxj9mtrs34vs97wjrv","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1nxlvf9mj3jzgue25n5d9y47s3h5hvg0ded9hwpejdxj9mtrs34vs97wjrv","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2011-12-22\n🗒️ Summary of this message: A proposal for a hierarchical network where miners/supernodes are tightly interconnected at the top and lightweight clients verify transactions at the bottom.\n📝 Original message:On 2011 December 21 Wednesday, Christian Decker wrote:\n\n\u003e Supernodes will be those nodes that verify all transactions and make them\n\u003e available to miners. Since miners will become more and more specialized\n\u003e these supernodes are likely to be owned by the miners themself. To be a\n\u003e miner either you need to verify all the transactions you include (otherwise\n\u003e others might be able to find an error in your block and thus drop it) or\n\u003e have someone that verifies them for you. In the end I think we'll end up\n\u003e with a hierarchical network, with the miners/supernodes tighly\n\u003e interconnected at the top and the lightweight clients that simply verify\n\u003e transactions (or their inputs to be precise) that are destined for them at\n\u003e the bottom.\n\nA thought occurred to me.  We already run a decentralised system, but it's \ndone by making everyone duplicate all other work.  There is no fundamental \nreason why all work needs to be duplicated though.  What about this: every \nnode randomly chooses whether to verify any particular transaction.  If we \nassume the network is large and the random factor is correctly chosen, then we \ncan still guarantee that every transaction is verified.  Then, we simply add a \nprotocol message that is a negative-announce transaction.  That is to say, we \ngive nodes a way of telling other nodes that they think a transaction is \ninvalid.  The other nodes are then free to verify _that_ assertion and forward \nthe negative-announce.\n\nMiners can then listen for negative-announcements and use them to decide were \nto dedicate their verification efforts.  They then don't need to verify all \n(or perhaps even any) transactions themselves and can dedicate their \nprocessing power to mining.\n\n(I've actually mentioned this idea before, but that time I was using it as a \ndouble-spend prevention method).\n\n\n\nAndy\n\n-- \nDr Andy Parkins\nandyparkins at gmail.com\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 198 bytes\nDesc: This is a digitally signed message part.\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20111222/b2825251/attachment.sig\u003e"}