Bitcoin Forum
November 06, 2024, 06:54:08 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 28.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Do I understand proof-of-work correctly?  (Read 1067 times)
Alonzo Ewing (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1040
Merit: 1001


View Profile
January 01, 2014, 01:27:22 AM
 #1

It seems like the consensus boils down to the fact that miners want to make money. 

In other words, no miner wants their work to be for naught, so they want to choose the same version of the blockchain they think everyone else will choose.  If they did choose the wrong version of the blockchain, their mining rewards would be rendered worthless. 

This results in a "lots of versions of the blockchain" being an unstable state, and "single blockchain" being a stable state.  Consensus is achieved.

It's all because of the incentive to make money.

Is this correct?
Alonzo Ewing (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1040
Merit: 1001


View Profile
January 01, 2014, 07:54:22 PM
 #2

Anyone?
t1000
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182
Merit: 100


View Profile
January 01, 2014, 10:05:36 PM
 #3

Forks of the block chain win by length. Bitcoin is democratic. By mining on top on a given fork, you are "voting" on the fork you agree with.

Usually there is only one block chain that everyone agrees to. Sometimes there are conflicts, e.g. if 2 miners in different parts of the world submitting a block at the same time.

From one end of the world, the block chain looks like:

Last block -> Miner A's block -> ?

From the other end of the world, the block chain looks like:

Last block -> Miner B's block -> ?

All over the world, miners will see these two blocks in different orders, and will decide to mine on top of one chain or the other depending on the order the blocks arrived at them.

Obviously Miner A will mine on Last block -> Miner A's block -> ? and Miner B will mine on Last block -> Miner B's block -> ?

Eventually one fork gets longer more quickly and wins, the other fork gets orphaned.

Sometimes you hear people mentioning 51% attacks. This is when a miner, say Miner A, has enough hashing power to ignore seeing

Last block -> Miner B's block -> ?

and produce

Last block -> Miner A's block -> Miner A's block -> ?

fast enough to WIN.


Did you find my posts helpful? Did I say say something nice? Your generosity is much appreciate.
BTC: 1G7chBLoYqGfdyfkrox53yDn6sS65PgFYk
LTC: LiYeFdbv5oxin9S3Wmn4v84LuGZ9nsE4XZ
Alonzo Ewing (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1040
Merit: 1001


View Profile
January 01, 2014, 10:33:08 PM
 #4

Thanks.

But what incentivizes miners to mine on the longest fork?
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079


Gerald Davis


View Profile
January 01, 2014, 10:35:53 PM
 #5

Thanks.

But what incentivizes miners to mine on the longest fork?

The longest* fork has the greatest chance of remaining the longest fork.  All other forks will be orphaned and any generated coins on orphaned forks are worthless.  It is in a miners self interest to avoid worthless coins and that means always building off the longest fork.  Thus when miners learn that another block has been found which extends the primary chain they will switch and build off of that.  Doing anything else means a reduction in income.


* Longest technically means the most work not necessarily the most blocks as Bitcoin selects as the primary chain the one with the highest collective difficulty.
Alonzo Ewing (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1040
Merit: 1001


View Profile
January 01, 2014, 10:39:20 PM
 #6

OK cool, that's basically what I was trying to say in my first post.  There's a financial incentive toward a single fork (the longest fork).  Consensus for the "correct" blockchain is achieved via financial incentive.
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!