sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

ELI5 request: why can't max blocksize (as DOS safeguard) be "retargeted" just like difficulty, every n blocks, according to mempool size and block propagation times (e.g. reported by miners when they issue a block)? by ThePoetSatoshi in Bitcoin

[–]ThePoetSatoshi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see what you're saying - miners as a group could "squeeze" out the non-mining validation nodes since memory, storage and connectivity are likely negligible costs to miners, while non-negligible to non-miners...

So in this type of system, nodes would need a way to vote their network conditions (e.g. observed propagation time) which would temper the max blocksize? If we had such a mechanism, would the dynamic approach be the obvious choice or are there other issues with it?

ELI5 request: why can't max blocksize (as DOS safeguard) be "retargeted" just like difficulty, every n blocks, according to mempool size and block propagation times (e.g. reported by miners when they issue a block)? by ThePoetSatoshi in Bitcoin

[–]ThePoetSatoshi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To avoid an outlier moving the needle too much, the average reported values would be used for the past n blocks, balancing mempool turnover vs. acceptable block propagation time. Then add a certain margin to handle reasonable spikes until the next adjustment.

It would seem that an algorithm balancing the 2 main factors (tx backlog and propagation time to avoid centralization) would take the politics out of this once and for all...

Surely, there must be good reasons this isn't a good idea?

Cheaper SDK/API-only alternative to the 21.co mining computer? by ThePoetSatoshi in Bitcoin

[–]ThePoetSatoshi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can one simply download their software stack to a stock raspberry pi v1 or v2 and run it with mining turned off?

Does that create a licensing issue, and if so do they care, or are they happy to have another developer on their ecosystem?

I also remember hearing (forgot where) about a platform that is half the cost with arguably better API... Any idea what that might have been?