maaku says that the current BIPs are flawed: fixed constants could be wrong, miner voting could diverge from user's interests.
-
-
Replying to @zooko
The other problem is, as we've seen here in the last two days, the miners do not *want* to make that decision.
#ScalingBitcoin1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @zooko
They don't see it as their role, they don't think they should be asked to do that.
#ScalingBitcoin1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @zooko
Solution: impose economic costs on voting so that miners are incentivized to reflect user preferences.
#ScalingBitcoin1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @zooko
Proposal: to increase, defer part of block reward; To decrease: reclaim previously deferred reward.
#ScalingBitcoin1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @zooko
Allow users to increase or decrease sensitivity via bitcoin-days-destroyed weighted votes.
#ScalingBitcoin1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @zooko
This scheme is derived from ideas by Greg Maxwell, Peter Todd, Meni Rosenfeld, and Jeff Garzik.
#ScalingBitcoin1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @zooko
The code is written: https://github.com/maaku/bitcoin/tree/flexcap …
#ScalingBitcoin2 replies 9 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @zooko
Future work: back-test it against corpuses of blocks and mempools.
#ScalingBitcoin1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @zooko
Actually I'm still confused. How come miners aren't already incentivized to pick the blocksize which is optimal for users?
#ScalingBitcoin3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
-
-
Replying to @peterktodd
@petertoddbtc Don't miners have the incentive to aggregate over the preferences of all users—i.e. to make the most money?#ScalingBitcoin1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - 6 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.