Hey Everyone,
A lot of work has gone into this paper, and the current revision has been
well received and there is a lot of excitement on this side to be sharing
it with you today. There are so few people that truly understand this
topic, but we are all pulling in the same direction to make
Hi,
This is a pretty big departure from cumulative POW.
Could you explain to me what you see happening if a node with this patch
and no history starts to sync, and some random node gives it a block
with a better fitness test for say height 250,000? No other solution
will have a better
Hey Jeremy,
Thanks for your response, but I think you misunderstood a crucial feature
- with a fitness test you have a 100% chance of a new block from being
accepted, and only a 50% or less chance for replacing a block which has
already been mined. This is all about keeping incentives moving
Hey Thomas,
A fitness value is only additive for the length of the disagreement, and
only used to solve disagreements of the same height. This isn't as large
of a departure as you are expecting. For 50,000 blocks of agreement, then
no floating point value is calculated.
All the best,
Mike
On
Re: Floating-Point Nakamoto Consensus (bitcoin ml)
>
> This is a pretty big departure from cumulative POW.
It's still cumulative. But instead of cumulating network difficulty,
they cumulate log_2(solution difficulty).
So if two solutions are found simultaneously, and one has a hash
that's only
If I understand correctly, this is purely a policy level decision to accept
first-seen or a secondary deterministic test, but the most-work chain is
still always better than a "more fit" but less work chain.
In any case, I'm skeptical of the properties of this change. First-seen has
a nice
