On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 06:42:05PM +0800, Pindar Wong wrote: > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Mike Hearn <m...@plan99.net> wrote: > > > Whilst it would be nice if miners in China can carry on forever regardless > > of their internet situation, nobody has any inherent "right" to mine if > > they can't do the job - if miners in China can't get the trivial amounts of > > bandwidth required through their firewall and end up being outcompeted then > > OK, too bad, we'll have to carry on without them. > > > > I'd rather think of mining as a responsibility than a right per se, but > you're right in so far as it's competitive and self-correcting.
It's important to remember that the service Bitcoin miners are providing us is *not* transaction validation, but rather decentralization. Validation is something every full node does already; there's no shortage of it. What's tricky is designing a Bitcoin protocol that creates the appropriate incentives for mining to remain decentralized, so we get good value for the large amount of money being sent to miners. I've often likened this task to building a robot to go to the grocery store to buy milk for you. If that robot doesn't have a nose, before long store owners are going to realise it can't tell the difference between unspoilt and spoilt milk, and you're going to get ripped off paying for a bunch of spoiled milk. Designing a Bitcoin protocol where we expect "competition" to result in smaller miners in more geographically decentralized places to get outcompeted by larger miners who are more geographically centralized gets us bad value for our money. Sure it's "self-correcting", but not in a way that we want. > > But I'm not sure why it should be a big deal. They can always run a node > > on a server in Taiwan and connect the hardware to it via a VPN or so. > > > > > Let's agree to disagree on this point. Note how that VPN, and likely VPS it's connected too, immediately adds another one or two points of failure to the whole system. Not only does this decrease reliability, it also decreases security by making attacks significantly easier - VPS security is orders of magnitude worse than the security of physical hardware. -- 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org 00000000000000000e187b95a9159d04a3586dd4cbc068be88a3eafcb5b885f9
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
