Hi Mike,
Thanks for the feedback and letting me know that my earlier emails fell
victim to spam.
My scheme might be better because it would add further incentives for
running full nodes. A full node can be run on even a cheap laptop. In my
experience, once a person new to bitcoin accepts it as
This is an interesting idea from the standpoint of trying to incentivize
people to run nodes, though from a high level it seems to just be adding
complexity to the current process by which nodes 'endorse' blocks. When a
node receives and validates a block it then informs its peers of the new
Thanks for the feedback and questions. Answers inline.
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Jameson Lopp jameson.l...@gmail.com
wrote:
This is an interesting idea from the standpoint of trying to incentivize
people to run nodes, though from a high level it seems to just be adding
complexity to
Having stakeholders endorse blocks has, according to you, the benefits
of increasing the number of full nodes and making a 51% attack more
expensive. It seems to me it would have the opposite effects and other
negative side effects. Any stakeholder that has won could just be
running an SPV
I definitely need to have an deeper understanding of that paper before
proceeding. Thanks for the reference!
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 4:58 PM, Andrew Lapp la...@purdue.edu wrote:
Having stakeholders endorse blocks has, according to you, the benefits
of increasing the number of full nodes and
I'm soliciting feedback on an idea to will improve security, increase the
number of full nodes, and provide more avenues for bitcoin distribution.
The idea is still in its infancy, but I need constructive feedback before I
take this further, or decide to abandon the idea.
In particular, my ego is
6 matches
Mail list logo
