rich1.0npub1swfeusu3ua9trup00qcnrgc2yndksyvgku4epk5tec7u4fmrez6qxpul5thttps://nostr.ae/npub1swfeusu3ua9trup00qcnrgc2yndksyvgku4epk5tec7u4fmrez6qxpul5tnjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2014-04-23 📝 Original message:> And it still would. Non-collusive miners cast votes based on the outcome > of their own attempts to double spend. > Individually rational strategy is to vote for coinbase reallocation on every block. Yes, in that case nobody will get reward. It is similar to prisoner's dilemma: equilibrium has worst pay-off. In practice that would mean that simple game-theoretic models are no longer applicable, as they lead to absurd results. > I'm using it in the same sense Satoshi used it. Honest miners work to > prevent double spends. That's the entire justification for their existence. > Miners that are deliberately trying to double spend are worse than useless. > Miners work to get rewards. It absolutely doesn't matter whether they are deliberately trying to double-spend or not: they won't be able to double-spend without a collusion. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140423/94b5255c/attachment.html>