-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Last updated: 2017/03/25 04:48 UTC
Bitcoin Proof-of-Work Update Initiative
To research the suitability of alternate proof-of-work algorithms, to test them, and then to implement the algorithm that makes it through these filters as Bitcoin mainnet's new proof-of-work function.
- luke-jr - renowned Bitcoin Core developer - Development
- /u/riiume (me) - Marketing/publishing
- desantis - is working on a PoW fork proposal
- ... Perhaps you? If interested in going full bore on this project, please PM me, along with a one sentence bio, then you will be added to this list.
We are not here to debate against PoW change
-- this thread is for people who have already
decided to help with a PoW change of some kind. It is, however, acceptable (and desirable) to debate exactly what kind
of PoW fork, based on data, testing, exploit discovery, etc.
Claims Worth Testing
(pm me if you would like to recommend edits to this list)
] Cuckoo cycle is one of the most ASIC-resistant Proof-of-Work algorithms.
Bitmain is close to having de facto
control of a great majority of the network hashrate:
"Bitmain, one of bitcoin’s biggest miners with a current hash-share of around 15% of the network, is to launch a new giant mining facility this December with 45 rooms, independent substations, offices and a total size of 140,000 kilowatts.
By some calculations, that translates to around 45% of the network hash-share, but it is not clear whether the new facilities are simply for a relocation or to accommodate additional mining power."
[ Quentson, A. (2016, February 11). "Bitmain to Launch a Giant New Bitcoin Mining Center
This poses the risk of:
- transaction censorship ("PBoC does not approve of your transaction, so Bitmain has their pools exclude it from blocks")
- double-spend attacks (if Bitmain is not motivated by mining profits (as a KnC miner executive once speculated) because e.g. their real profits come from a ChinaGov paycheck), then they will happily destroy the value of Bitcoin's network by executing double-spend attacks.
Recommended Discussion Guidelines
Given the urgency of settling these issues in order to protect Bitcoin's prime reputation and its adoption rate, I offer the following recommended ranking of types of communications on this thread, starting with the most valuable at (1):
(1) Empirical data
- Tests, competitive benchmarks between PoW algorithms when merged with Bitcoin codebase, accurate descriptions of vulnerabilities/exploits with sample code.
(2) Analysis of data
- Identification and further extrapolation of patterns in data, technical critique of methods used in tests, model-based predictions of outcomes of tests (if the tests themselves are too resource/labor intensive to actually carry out)
(3) Interpretation of results
- Discussion (with proof/justification) of what the results and analysis of the tests will mean for the Bitcoin market cap
, and any new vulnerabilities
(4) Broader discussion
- Including discussion of businesses related to Bitcoin, quotes by notable personalities relevant to Bitcoin, regulations and other activities of governments with respect to Bitcoin, and what implications these things have for the PoW project.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----