{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1kpxa282a99fc93xx30ru3sfmqnyqk3r8aurz3znzxyslhd7felfsg7e3fd","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1kpxa282a99fc93xx30ru3sfmqnyqk3r8aurz3znzxyslhd7felfsg7e3fd","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-12-27\n📝 Original message:Last I heard it was believed the miner had made their own mining client\nand that the block withholding was a bug, not an intended feature.\n\nOn 26.12.2015 09:12, Multipool Admin via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e Any attempt to 'fix' this problem, would most likely require changes to\n\u003e all mining software, why not just make mining more decentralized in general?\n\u003e \n\u003e For example, allow anyone to submit proofs of work to Bitcoind that are\n\u003e some fraction of the network difficulty and receive payment for them if\n\u003e they're valid.  This would also encourage the proliferation of full\n\u003e nodes since anyone could solo mine again.  Then, the next coinbase\n\u003e transaction could be split among, say, the top 100 proofs of work.\n\u003e \n\u003e Eligius already does their miner payouts like this.\n\u003e \n\u003e If you want to fix an issue with mining, fix the selfish mining issue\n\u003e first as it's a much larger and more dangerous potential issue.\n\u003e \n\u003e I don't believe it was ever clearly established whether Eligius suffered\n\u003e a block withholding attack or was just the victim of a miner with (what\n\u003e was, at the time) a large amount of faulty hardware, however, from the\n\u003e Bitcointalk threads at the time I believe it was assumed to be the latter.\n\u003e \n\u003e --Adam\n\u003e \n\u003e \n\u003e On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 8:44 PM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev\n\u003e \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e \u003cmailto:bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \n\u003e     On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 07:43:59PM -0800, Chris Priest via\n\u003e     bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e     \u003e Then shouldn't this be something the pool deals with, not the bitcoin protocol?\n\u003e \n\u003e     There is no known way for pools - especially ones that allow anonymous\n\u003e     hashers - to effectively prevent block withholding attacks without\n\u003e     changing the Bitcoin protocol.\n\u003e \n\u003e     --\n\u003e     'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org \u003chttp://petertodd.org\u003e\n\u003e     00000000000000000188b6321da7feae60d74c7b0becbdab3b1a0bd57f10947d\n\u003e \n\u003e     _______________________________________________\n\u003e     bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e     bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e     \u003cmailto:bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e\n\u003e     https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e \n\u003e \n\u003e \n\u003e \n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e"}