Bitcoin Forum
July 19, 2018, 05:02:54 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.16.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Why does the difficulty change every 2016 blocks but not 2000 or 2100?  (Read 552 times)
findftp
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008
Merit: 1000


Delusional crypto obsessionist


View Profile
October 31, 2016, 03:17:09 PM
 #1

I know 2016 blocks is roughly two weeks, but why did satoshi chose this connection of the protocol to the 'real' world?
I mean, for me it would make some sense to make it sync with the block reward period which is 210000 blocks.
2016 is not a factor of 210000.

Was this done deliberately? Yes, of course it was, but why?
Was this number chosen as some sort of 1337 hint to this 2016 election year?

Why did Satoshi not sync this to the block reward period and use 2000 or 2100 blocks(which are both a factor of 210000), which 2000 as most obvious round number.

Since bitcoin is a global internet phenonemon it doesn't make sense to me to sync the difficulty adjustment with 2 earthly weeks.

Personally I stick with the 1337 explanation until I see another reasonable explanation.

1FdwDuV2qgsw2w1Lza8nsea7L6mQxsc7g3
1531976574
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1531976574

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1531976574
Reply with quote  #2

1531976574
Report to moderator
1531976574
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1531976574

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1531976574
Reply with quote  #2

1531976574
Report to moderator
1531976574
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1531976574

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1531976574
Reply with quote  #2

1531976574
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1531976574
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1531976574

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1531976574
Reply with quote  #2

1531976574
Report to moderator
achow101
Moderator
Legendary
*
expert
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470
Merit: 1453


3F1Y9yquzvY6RWvKbw2n2zeo9V5mvBhADU


View Profile WWW
October 31, 2016, 03:31:31 PM
 #2

Like literally every other number in Bitcoin, it is essentially arbitrarily chosen, not some conspiracy or reference to something.

The idea is to have the retarget every two weeks. In order to do that with 10 minute blocks, you take two weeks in minutes and divide by ten. That happens to be 20160 / 10 = 2016. Hence 2016 blocks.

cr1776
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932
Merit: 1005


View Profile
October 31, 2016, 04:37:34 PM
 #3

...
I mean, for me it would make some sense to make it sync with the block reward period which is 210000 blocks.
2016 is not a factor of 210000.

Was this done deliberately? Yes, of course it was, but why?
...
Why did Satoshi not sync this to the block reward period and use 2000 or 2100 blocks(which are both a factor of 210000), which 2000 as most obvious round number.


...

Regarding syncing with the block reward period, there was also some intent to avoid having both occur simultaneously to decrease the variability of having two events occur at the same block.  It is almost always preferable to have one variable and everything else constant in a complex system.
findftp
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008
Merit: 1000


Delusional crypto obsessionist


View Profile
October 31, 2016, 04:42:45 PM
 #4

...
I mean, for me it would make some sense to make it sync with the block reward period which is 210000 blocks.
2016 is not a factor of 210000.

Was this done deliberately? Yes, of course it was, but why?
...
Why did Satoshi not sync this to the block reward period and use 2000 or 2100 blocks(which are both a factor of 210000), which 2000 as most obvious round number.


...

Regarding syncing with the block reward period, there was also some intent to avoid having both occur simultaneously to decrease the variability of having two events occur at the same block.

Sounds legit, thought of this also.

Then we can also completely ignore that this was my 2016th post...  Got nothing to do with it... Wink

Edit,.. and my activity being exactly half of it, 1008... Huh

1FdwDuV2qgsw2w1Lza8nsea7L6mQxsc7g3
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!