{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1kf0ppcjaguxekg24yx6smgxlu73qn0k8lm0t2wrqc0scpl7u3sgsmf3f58","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1kf0ppcjaguxekg24yx6smgxlu73qn0k8lm0t2wrqc0scpl7u3sgsmf3f58","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2012-05-24\n📝 Original message:There appears to be some non-trivial mining power devoted to mining\nempty blocks.  Even with satoshi's key observation -- hash a fixed\n80-byte header, not the entire block -- some miners still find it\neasier to mine empty blocks, rather than watch the network for new\ntransactions.\n\nTherefore I was wondering what people thought about a client\nimplementation change:\n\n     - Do not store or relay empty blocks, if time since last block \u003c X\n       (where X = 60 minutes, perhaps)\n\nor even stronger,\n\n     - Ensure latest block includes at least X percent of mempool\nunconfirmed TXs\n\nThe former is easier to implement, though there is the danger that\nno-TX miners simply include a statically generated transaction or two.\n\nThe latter might be considered problematic, as it might refuse to\nrelay quickly found blocks.\n\nComments?  It wouldn't be a problem if these no-TX blocks were not\nalready getting frequent (1 in 20).\n\n-- \nJeff Garzik\nexMULTI, Inc.\njgarzik at exmulti.com"}