Bitcoin Forum
December 18, 2017, 08:21:56 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Preventing miners from switching mining power  (Read 879 times)
Jus12
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 10


View Profile
November 13, 2017, 08:09:54 PM
 #1

Perhaps the next addition to bitcoin or some altcoin should have methods to dissuade miners from switching chains

A few ideas:

The probability of mining a block depends on a moving window that determines how many blocks have been previously mined by that address.

Reward for addresses who mine regularly are higher

Some sort of PoS and PoW combination (PoS alone will lead to miners building on competing chains simultaneously).

Any other suggestions?
1513585316
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513585316

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513585316
Reply with quote  #2

1513585316
Report to moderator
1513585316
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513585316

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513585316
Reply with quote  #2

1513585316
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1513585316
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513585316

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513585316
Reply with quote  #2

1513585316
Report to moderator
1513585316
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513585316

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513585316
Reply with quote  #2

1513585316
Report to moderator
1513585316
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513585316

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513585316
Reply with quote  #2

1513585316
Report to moderator
Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260

#PathOfTotality


View Profile WWW
November 14, 2017, 05:19:15 AM
 #2

Addresses really should not be reused, including addresses that receive the block reward from the coinbase transaction.

DooMAD
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1456



View Profile WWW
November 14, 2017, 08:29:20 AM
 #3

Perhaps the next addition to bitcoin or some altcoin should have methods to dissuade miners from switching chains

A few ideas:

The probability of mining a block depends on a moving window that determines how many blocks have been previously mined by that address.

Reward for addresses who mine regularly are higher

If you give advantages to existing miners, you would only encourage further centralisation of mining.  Changing the reward also results in issues with the 21 million total capitalisation.  Screwing with the current formula should be done with extreme caution, if it even has to be done at all.  There's a pretty large chance of making a mess that can't be fixed if we get that wrong.

The best way to discourage (because no one should be trying to prevent things in a permissionless system) switching chains is to give this chain the best natural incentives to mine.  Trying to lock miners in against their will probably isn't the best way to go about incentivising them.  Generally that just means making sure this chain maintains the most economic activity and maybe, just maybe, not polarising the blocksize issue so much that it results in a near-miss of a permanent split in the community.  It's not entirely fair to blame them wanting to switch chains if we completely disregard their views on how this chain should go forward.  You can't have your cake and eat it.

Jus12
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 10


View Profile
November 14, 2017, 10:54:24 AM
 #4

Perhaps the next addition to bitcoin or some altcoin should have methods to dissuade miners from switching chains

A few ideas:

The probability of mining a block depends on a moving window that determines how many blocks have been previously mined by that address.

Reward for addresses who mine regularly are higher

If you give advantages to existing miners, you would only encourage further centralisation of mining.  Changing the reward also results in issues with the 21 million total capitalisation.  Screwing with the current formula should be done with extreme caution, if it even has to be done at all.  There's a pretty large chance of making a mess that can't be fixed if we get that wrong.

The best way to discourage (because no one should be trying to prevent things in a permissionless system) switching chains is to give this chain the best natural incentives to mine.  Trying to lock miners in against their will probably isn't the best way to go about incentivising them.  Generally that just means making sure this chain maintains the most economic activity and maybe, just maybe, not polarising the blocksize issue so much that it results in a near-miss of a permanent split in the community.  It's not entirely fair to blame them wanting to switch chains if we completely disregard their views on how this chain should go forward.  You can't have your cake and eat it.

yes that's why its probably going to be an altcoin since it requires major changes. Also, I see nothing wrong in forcing someone to behave according to protocol. For instance signatures force people to not steal funds.
Jet Cash
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Activity: 728



View Profile WWW
November 14, 2017, 02:43:28 PM
 #5

Any barrier that discourages new entrants to the mining field is bad for Bitcoin in my opinion.

>> Bitcoin  Chained <<             $$$$$  Bitcoin info site domain name for sale $$$$$$$
BitcoinChained.com click on the domain link to buy it for $95
Immediate transfer with a Bitcoin payment.
DooMAD
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1456



View Profile WWW
November 14, 2017, 02:50:33 PM
 #6

yes that's why its probably going to be an altcoin since it requires major changes. Also, I see nothing wrong in forcing someone to behave according to protocol. For instance signatures force people to not steal funds.

Miners are already forced to follow the rules within the protocol.  What you're talking about is trying to force them to stay confined to one protocol, preventing them being able to leave it and use another protocol.  That's something else entirely.  How would you like it if someone tried to force you not to sell your BTC for altcoins?  That's no one else's decision but yours.  Similarly, it's no one else's decision but the miners where they point their hardware at any given moment.

I wish you all the best in launching your "sign up for slavery" altcoin.   Roll Eyes

mammon
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 321



View Profile
November 14, 2017, 03:14:29 PM
 #7

You cannot fight personal Greed...
ETFbitcoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162



View Profile
November 14, 2017, 06:13:45 PM
 #8

I doubt miners or pool will use only an address (unless they're too lazy to change address every few weeks or every blocks they found), also as far as i know PoS have some vulnerability and it would make bitcoin become altcoin.
I think the real problem isn't whether miners switching coins that they mine, but sudden bitcoin mining hashrate decreased which leads to slow block generation and cause transaction got slower confirmation. Readjust mining difficulty less than every 2048 block or automatically decrease mining difficulty when no block mined after few hours (similar to BCH, CMIIW) aren't bad idea.

DooMAD
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1456



View Profile WWW
November 16, 2017, 07:01:52 PM
 #9

Readjust mining difficulty less than every 2048 block or automatically decrease mining difficulty when no block mined after few hours (similar to BCH, CMIIW) aren't bad idea.

There are visible drawbacks, though.  The Emergency Difficulty Adjustment BCH implemented has resulted in them being (at the time of writing) 9773 blocks ahead of the BTC chain, which means, causally, they've also altered their distribution and supply rate.  BTC has a circulating supply of 16,683,150 BTC, whereas BCH currently has 16,805,300, over 100k extra coins in circulation.  Being able to make credible and predictable guarantees about the total supply is an important aspect of Bitcoin's overall appeal.

avikz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742



View Profile
November 16, 2017, 11:33:24 PM
 #10

Perhaps the next addition to bitcoin or some altcoin should have methods to dissuade miners from switching chains

A few ideas:

The probability of mining a block depends on a moving window that determines how many blocks have been previously mined by that address.

Reward for addresses who mine regularly are higher

Some sort of PoS and PoW combination (PoS alone will lead to miners building on competing chains simultaneously).

Any other suggestions?

I don't think it is humanely possible to control someone's mining interest and it's not right as well. However, among the ideas listed by you, I can say rewarding a long term and good miner with incentives can prevent their will to go for another coin. The first idea will discourage the miners and that is bad for the bitcoin eco system. But incentive is the only thing that can keep the miners glued to a single coin.

    ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄   
   ████████████████████████████████  
     ▀██████████████████████████▀    
        ▀████████████████████▀       
          ████████████████▀         
            █████████████           
            ▀████████████▀           
             ▀██████████▀            
              ██████████             
               ████████              
               ▀██████▀              
                ██████               
                  ▀                  
.
.trade.io.
██████
██████
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
██████
██████

▄██████████████████▄
███       ▀███████
███       █████████
███       █████████
███       █████████
███              ██
███   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄   ███
███   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄   ███
███              ███
███▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███
██████████████████▀

▄██████████████████▄
███████████▀ ███████
█████████▀   ███████
███████▀     ██▀ ███
███ ▀▀       █▄▄████
███          █▀▀▀▀██
███ ▄▄       ███████
██████▄     █▄ ▀███
█████████▄   ███▄███
███████████▄ ███████
▀██████████████████▀

▄██████████████████▄
████████████████████
███████████████▀▀ ██
█████████▀▀     ███
████▀▀     ▄█▀   ███
███▄    ▄██      ███
█████████▀      ▄██
█████████▄     ████
█████████████▄ ▄████
████████████████████
▀██████████████████▀
██████
██████
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
██████
██████
.
.Join the Trading Revolution.
Borilla
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 52


View Profile
November 17, 2017, 12:10:44 AM
 #11

correct me if i'm wrong: the problem is the "sudden" increase or decrease of hashpower. Most particularly a sudden "hidden" increase like a selfish mining attack. And that would be unnoticeable until too late.

Kprawn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330


★Bitvest.io★ Play Plinko or Invest!


View Profile
November 17, 2017, 04:42:59 PM
 #12

Perhaps the next addition to bitcoin or some altcoin should have methods to dissuade miners from switching chains

A few ideas:

The probability of mining a block depends on a moving window that determines how many blocks have been previously mined by that address.

Reward for addresses who mine regularly are higher

Some sort of PoS and PoW combination (PoS alone will lead to miners building on competing chains simultaneously).

Any other suggestions?

I support this idea, but only because I feel that miners are misusing their power to force people to do what they want. You

can have the choice to decide what you want to mine, but then you have to stick to that. This jumping between forks is

only benefitting them and millions of people are suffering because of that.  Angry

Cryptelo
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14

Secure KeyManagement for the Blockchain Generation


View Profile WWW
November 17, 2017, 05:04:35 PM
 #13

addresses should not be reused.

Cryptelo║Upcoming ICO║ ▰ ▰Cryptelo.com ▰ ▰
DooMAD
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1456



View Profile WWW
November 18, 2017, 09:28:39 AM
 #14

You can have the choice to decide what you want to mine, but then you have to stick to that. This jumping between forks is only benefitting them and millions of people are suffering because of that.  Angry

Sounds like a double standard when you've got an Ethereum-related sig.  You have the choice to decide what coins or chains you want to transact on, but you aren't limited to one.  So if you don't have to stick to one thing, why should they? 

And the more important point you need to consider is that carrots are generally considered a better incentive than sticks.  If you make Bitcoin so restrictive that miners have no freedom of any kind, other chains/coins will definitely start to look more appealing by comparison.  If you successfully implemented something like this, you might get the opposite effect to what you intended.  More miners may leave, and for good this time.

I'm confident you won't get past the brainstorming phase with any of this, because it's not even remotely practical and would likely have too many negative consequences to be worth the risk.






Thirdspace
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 462


Mixing reinvented for your privacy | chipmixer.com


View Profile
November 18, 2017, 10:01:30 AM
 #15

Addresses really should not be reused, including addresses that receive the block reward from the coinbase transaction.
Addresses really should not be reused, including addresses that receive the block reward from the coinbase transaction.
addresses should not be reused.
lol Cheesy quickseller's post copy pasted by bots blatantly in the same thread and even on the same page

anyway... back on the topic
next difficulty is based on total last hash power solving the last block, am I right?
is it possible to make the difficulty adjustment more responsive and adapt faster?
by the recent event, I can see the difficulty stayed high even when lots miners abandoned BTC
that resulted a big gap between blocks because the imbalance of hash power and current difficulty
is there a way to improve difficulty retarget so that miners hopping would be less profitable

ranochigo
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1288


View Profile WWW
November 18, 2017, 10:37:59 AM
 #16

next difficulty is based on total last hash power solving the last block, am I right?
No. Its the average time interval between each of the generation of the last 2016 block at the point of difficulty adjustment.
is it possible to make the difficulty adjustment more responsive and adapt faster?
Yes. You have to switch to a different algorithm like Kimoto Gravity Well which does have quite a few downsides. It isn't especially useful for Bitcoin and it should not be implemented nor anything regarding the difficulty should be changed.
by the recent event, I can see the difficulty stayed high even when lots miners abandoned BTC
that resulted a big gap between blocks because the imbalance of hash power and current difficulty
is there a way to improve difficulty retarget so that miners hopping would be less profitable
Uh. It was more about the rise in the price of BCH. If it were to keep rising, miners wouldn't consider mining Bitcoins at all.














 

 

█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
BitBlender 

 













 















 












 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
bob123
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406



View Profile
November 18, 2017, 02:57:21 PM
 #17

The probability of mining a block depends on a moving window that determines how many blocks have been previously mined by that address.

I dont think this is a good idea since addresses should be generally only used once. And additionally this leads to centralization of mining.
Big miners get higher probabilty of mining the next block.. thats a catch-22.

Reward for addresses who mine regularly are higher

Thats basically like the first point? I don't see a considerable difference. Leads to centralization and not the way bitcoin is intended to be used.

Some sort of PoS and PoW combination (PoS alone will lead to miners building on competing chains simultaneously).

There is nothing which speaks against miners who mine on different chains simultaneously, as long as its PoS.

Its kind of hard to get miners stop switching from BTC to BCH mining and vice versa. The easiest way would be for one currency to use a different algorithm.
But since BCH follower think its the "real" bitcoin (until it crashes to 10-200$.. which very likely will happen) there won't be any updates to mining algorithms.

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!