Bitcoin Forum
May 12, 2024, 03:24:30 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: why not retarget dificulty more often?  (Read 668 times)
Anon136 (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1722
Merit: 1217



View Profile
April 09, 2013, 11:19:27 PM
 #1

Why did satoshi choose to have the difficulty re-target every 2000 blocks? why not 1000? why not 10? for that matter why not re-target every block?

it looks as if bytecoin is going to die and it seems as if this could have been prevented by allowing the difficulty to re-target more frequently. I was thinking every 8 blocks. I still think there is a lot of merit to the idea of a bitcoin clone for reasons i wont get into here, i have a thread about it. If bytecoin does die im thinking about adjusting the re-target rate and re-releasing it just looking for some feedback.

*note: im not looking for feedback on whether its a good idea to clone bitcoin, im looking for feedback on whether it is a good idea to lower the re-target rate"

Rep Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=381041
If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?
Unlike traditional banking where clients have only a few account numbers, with Bitcoin people can create an unlimited number of accounts (addresses). This can be used to easily track payments, and it improves anonymity.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1715484270
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715484270

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715484270
Reply with quote  #2

1715484270
Report to moderator
1715484270
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715484270

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715484270
Reply with quote  #2

1715484270
Report to moderator
1715484270
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715484270

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715484270
Reply with quote  #2

1715484270
Report to moderator
2112
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128
Merit: 1068



View Profile
April 09, 2013, 11:40:28 PM
 #2

If there are two competing blocks with two different timestamps at the end of the retarget period you end up with two sub-chains, each with different difficulty. They have to converge globally to the one longest chain.

This convergence is slower than the normal "orphan block/branch/sub-chain" convergence in the middle of the retarget period.

gmaxwell wrote several detailed posts about the issue, search his past posts for the word "convergence" and its variants.

Please comment, critique, criticize or ridicule BIP 2112: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=54382.0
Long-term mining prognosis: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=91101.0
Anon136 (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1722
Merit: 1217



View Profile
April 10, 2013, 12:04:49 AM
 #3

If there are two competing blocks with two different timestamps at the end of the retarget period you end up with two sub-chains, each with different difficulty. They have to converge globally to the one longest chain.

This convergence is slower than the normal "orphan block/branch/sub-chain" convergence in the middle of the retarget period.

gmaxwell wrote several detailed posts about the issue, search his past posts for the word "convergence" and its variants.


thankyou very much. I will do that search.

Rep Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=381041
If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!