<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><author_name>npub1wtx5qvewc7pd6znlvwktq03mdld05mv3h5dkzfwd3dc30gdmsptsugtuyn</author_name><author_url>https://nostr.ae/npub1wtx5qvewc7pd6znlvwktq03mdld05mv3h5dkzfwd3dc30gdmsptsugtuyn</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://nostr.ae</provider_url><html>📅 Original date posted:2011-09-14&#xA;🗒️ Summary of this message: The security of the Bitcoin protocol should be the top priority, even if it means putting pools at a disadvantage. Pool operators&#39; problems are also potential attackers&#39; problems.&#xA;📝 Original message:Am I the only one to think putting pools at a disadvantage is actually&#xA;desirable?&#xA;Back when pools started to appear we all had huge reservations about putting&#xA;so much control into the hands of a few pool operators, but nowadays it&#xA;seems that having pool operators control a vast majority of the&#xA;computational power is desired.&#xA;I do like pools (I use them myself), but we should put the security of the&#xA;protocol in first place and then only think about individual players.&#xA;Always remember that the problems pool operators encounter are likely also&#xA;the ones of a potential attacker that tries to accumulate 50%+ of the&#xA;network power :-)&#xA;&#xA;Regards,&#xA;Chris&#xA;On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 5:43 PM, Luke-Jr &lt;luke at dashjr.org&gt; wrote:&#xA;&#xA;&gt; On Wednesday, September 14, 2011 10:45:36 AM Gavin Andresen wrote:&#xA;&gt; &gt; The block timestamp rules currently give HOURS of wiggle-room for&#xA;&gt; &gt; timestamps. We can&#39;t change those rules without risking a chain split.&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&gt; And those hours of wiggle-room are not enough to cause a problem.&#xA;&gt; The problem only comes in (AFAIK) when the existing rules are *not*&#xA;&gt; enforced.&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&gt; &gt; Assuming a majority of pools/miners adopt the &#34;discourage blocks with&#xA;&gt; &gt; stale timestamps&#34; rule, that should squash any incentive for cartels&#xA;&gt; &gt; to try to start playing with difficulty-- you would have to have 50+%&#xA;&gt; &gt; power to start, or you risk producing mostly orphan blocks.&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&gt; As this is against pools/miners&#39; interests, and doesn&#39;t seem to solve any&#xA;&gt; real&#xA;&gt; problems, I&#39;m going to discourage its adoption if it ever gets done.&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&gt; ------------------------------------------------------------------------------&#xA;&gt; BlackBerry&amp;reg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA&#xA;&gt; Learn about the latest advances in developing for the&#xA;&gt; BlackBerry&amp;reg; mobile platform with sessions, labs &amp; more.&#xA;&gt; See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerry&amp;reg; DevCon today!&#xA;&gt; http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1&#xA;&gt; _______________________________________________&#xA;&gt; Bitcoin-development mailing list&#xA;&gt; Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net&#xA;&gt; https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development&#xA;&gt;&#xA;-------------- next part --------------&#xA;An HTML attachment was scrubbed...&#xA;URL: &lt;http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20110914/7cbfb95f/attachment.html&gt;</html></oembed>