Until the block rewards subsidy goes away, an empty block still technically has one transaction: the coinbase which distributes the generated coins from the block reward.
So, while it isn't adding any value by including other transactions, it does, indeed technically fit the definition of mining.
Every single definition of mining states "transactions", plural. Nothing is confirmed in an empty block, it does not meet the definition. Seems to me the empty block thing is a huge oversight, and that empty blocks should not be valid and the network should reject them. The only block that should have been considered valid with a single transaction generating coins was the genesis block. Has there been any analysis of an "empty block attack"? Imagine what would happen if an inordinate number of empty blocks were solved and submitted in succession? Bitcoin would effectively cease functioning. |
|
|
|
I'll source the Bitcoin Wiki for the definition of mining, https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mining. The very first sentance of the page states: Mining is the process of adding transaction records to Bitcoin's public ledger of past transactions. Here's a few other mining definitions (emphasis added by me): https://bitcoin.org/en/faq#what-is-bitcoin-miningMining is the process of spending computing power to process transactions, secure the network, and keep everyone in the system synchronized together. Mining software listens for transactions broadcast through the peer-to-peer network and performs appropriate tasks to process and confirm these transactions. http://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/bitcoin-mining.aspBitcoin mining is the process by which transactions are verified and added to the public ledger, known as the block chain, and also the means through which new bitcoin are released. http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/Bitcoin-miningBitcoin mining is the processing of transactions in the digital currency system, in which the records of current Bitcoin transactions, known as a blocks, are added to the record of past transactions, known as the block chain. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin#MiningMining is a record-keeping service.[note 9] Miners keep the block chain consistent, complete, and unalterable by repeatedly verifying and collecting newly broadcast transactions into a new group of transactions called a block. Therefore, I contend that if you're not adding transactions to the blockchain (i.e. solving an empty block) then you are not mining. |
|
|
|
Even an empty block helps people out. If nothing else, the empty block makes the coinbase transaction from 120 blocks previous become spendable. In practice, the empty block brings all those 5-confirmation transactions up to 6 confirmations (and 2-confirmation transactions up to 3 confirmations, etc.) The presence of the empty block makes transactions confirm faster than they would have if the empty block weren't there.
There is no need to try and "speed up" transactions artificially. Everything positive you said about an empty block applies to a block full of transaction, only the full block provided worth to the network because it contains transactions, which is a block's purpose. You even admit in your post that a full block is better than an empty block. And I still do not see any benefit from an empty block, but again I appreciate the attempt at explaining to me. |
|
|
|
|
Why do you have such an involvement in telling someone else how much they are going to fail? He's got a plan for what he wants to do, it doesn't affect you, there's no need for your negativity.
|
|
|
|
|
The only way you can receive bitcoin is to give out your (public) address, so yes, it is safe as has been noted.
|
|
|
|
so in the Bitcoin mining industry the hardware miner caries the largest financial burden versus the pool operator,with that said the miner can exist alone while the pool can't exist without the hardware owner.
The hardware miner also reaps the biggest reward, you have to weigh that into account and look at net cost, not gross. |
|
|
|
Empty blocks minimise your stale shares.
Why would you prioritize stale share rate over publishing a useful solved block? What wizkid057 said. But one point he made, more explicitly: The empty blocks found would not have been a "useful" solved block in any case. They would have been stale shares. Whether the pool sends an empty block or not, the miner should always begin working on the non-empty block as soon as it its data is received. ... oh, I already said that: Empty blocks minimise your stale shares.
Eligius (and probably most cluefully operated pools) send them as soon as a new block is found, so that you can begin mining immediately.
This is also followed up with an updated block full of transactions that miners can begin working on as soon as they receive it.
If your internet connection is 10 Gbps, the empty block might waste a few bytes of bandwidth and you'll get the full block immediately to begin working on.
If your internet connection isn't so fast, you'll begin working on the empty block, then transition to the full one as soon as you finish receiving it.
I appreciate the answers, but the "increases security" reason seems like nonsense to me. The purpose of the block is not to provide security, it is to record transactions. Security is inherent in the way the network was designed. Yes, the empty block is followed by a block of transactions, but I still contend that the empty block is worthless to the network. Happy mining. |
|
|
|
|
Check back in and let me know what you find.
|
|
|
|
Empty blocks minimise your stale shares.
Why would you prioritize stale share rate over publishing a useful solved block? I fail to see how pushing an empty block through provides any worth to the Bitcoin network. If the purpose of having blocks is to record transactions, and the purpose of having a blockchain is to have a record of those transaction, why send an empty block? What purpose does it serve? What benefit to the network does it provide? Why does the solver deserve 25 BTC for an empty block? Does this have a false impact on difficulty adjustment since the block is solved so quickly, yet has no value (other than to the solver)? |
|
|
|
|
A 14PH farm will pay nicely; this pool get's 0.5% of the reward per block. The "cost to run" each is not a valid comparison at all.
The biggest cost in running a pool properly is probably your time involvement.
|
|
|
|
|
If you're mining just for fun, get yourself an S3+. Used they're less than $100USD.
|
|
|
|
You are awesome brothers, wow! Mikestang thank you for your time, as to you Vod. You really helped someone out today!  US spelling is fine i guess, as long as it is flawless. You are right about it being a Executive Summary. I will fix that as well. You're most welcome. Check back in and lets us know your grade. |
|
|
|
|
A monetary penalty is no penalty at all when you can print all the money you need...
I wish they would start executing these fuckers like George Carlin suggested. You'd see shit clean up really quick.
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure what the character is, but it makes squiggly lines up my screen:  If I mouse over the topic link the squiggles shrink:  |
|
|
|
The miners build their station in the place where energy is really cheap – and they pay just 0.3 USD per 1 kWh.
Ahh, the power of a decimal place. 0.3USD/kWh is VERY HIGH, it's what I pay here in southern California. I'm sure they meant 0.03USD/kWh... |
|
|
|
You shouldn't re-use addresses.
Satoshi made one post about the re-use of bitcoin addresses and everyone takes it to the extreme. Please explain why someone should not re-use an address. I'll save you the effort, because there are no valid technical reasons. There are "privacy reasons" (bearing in mind that bitcoin was never intended to be, or portrayed as, an anonymous payment method) why re-use may be considered less than ideal, but I'm tired of seeing people say you should not do it like it's a plague or something. |
|
|
|
serious question- Is it really possible?
Serious answer - no. *cough* http://gizmodo.com/mining-bitcoin-with-pencil-and-paper-1640353309Now, practically speaking, the odds that you beat an ASIC to a valid solution are very, very...very much against you  [/quote] So the first post of this thread is retarded, but that link is very cool, I had not seen that before. |
|
|
|
|
"How do I get something for nothing?"
"How do I skip work and dedication and go right to the top?"
"Working for something is too hard, can someone show me the shortcut?"
whine whine whine
|
|
|
|
Does it really take months of work to make [snip}
The end of that sentence is unimportant. The answer is "No" if you don't care about the end product. The answer is "Yes" if you do care. The actual end product does not matter. If you want to be anonymous, then use an "anonymous" altcoin. If you're unhappy with Bitcoin code, re-code it and gain mass consensus that your way is better. |
|
|
|
Guys, literally a couple of posts above you It's all good, relax. OMG... like I have time to look up a whole 2 posts to see things like that!!!  Kidding of course. By the way, thanks for running the contest suchmoon. You're welcome. Thanks to philipma1957 mostly though - he's running the show, I'm just pushing the "Send" button at the end of it. Thank you both! I would have almost no interest in tracking difficulty between changes if it wasn't for these threads. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
