i think a better dynamic would be to make all rewards unspendable until the next difficulty adjustment... if you zero the block subsidy you will crash the hashrate and the network will be stuck until the subsidy comes back or the PoW algo changes again...

lol

What’s a better motive than profit?

They will still profit but not profit from attacking the network. They will profit from decentralized mining and being good actors in the network. Bad actors need to be disincentivized.

principle

How does that make any sense?

Why are you going even proposing things like this? You can’t stop anyone from doing this… This is getting out of hand Luke… I think you need to seriously re think what you are doing… Hope all is well have a great day.

Is there a free software alternative to join the discussion?

The proposal makes sense, if you are afraid of a dump. Why not just let it dump, though? Those "correction proposals" are looking at things from a very short term point of view. It makes more sense to let the difficulty adjustment to its thing and let the dumpers dump, in the long term, the market will correct it.

It's not about people dumping the coins. That's fine. I welcome that. Cheaper for me to buy. The problem is miners who don't care about decentralization, come for the quick sats and don't even set up their own Datum gateway. They end up using stratum instead of Datum. That gives power to the mining pools, which is one of the reasons for forking away from suitcoin. So by making it less attractive to mine (making them wait before they can sell their sats), you have a shot at driving away those actors, and keeping those who care about the long-term health of the network.

Holy shit Bcash Jr is already becoming a shit coin 🤣

Thanks for your inputs. I wonder if delaying the UTXO from the coinbase of a new block helps with mining decentralization though. Let's assume the delay increases to a month. Well then, the AlphaPool with ~30% of the hash rate of #blake2b will continue doing what it is doing, just get their sats with a delay, dump the coin if needed. In any case, a miner dumping too much of their coin, is never an interesting use case. It would mean that the price could dump also, meaning mining in and of itself is not a lucrative business anymore. Then you have to shutdown your miners. Difficulty adjustment kicks in again. This whole procedure has been working fine for years. On a general note, I don't think miners of #BTC on #blake2b are interested in sabotaging the network. If that is the case, they will only "pump and dump" it once, so to speak. Maybe that is their goal? I don't know. I believe making mining less attractive has always been a built in feature with a combination of coinbase UTXO delay + difficulty adjustment + #bitcoin price.

> Let's assume the delay increases to a month. Well then, the AlphaPool with ~30% of the hash rate of #blake2b will continue doing what it is doing, just get their sats with a delay, dump the coin if needed. Well, that's just the thing. It's likely that at least some of the miners in that pool will not want to wait around for one month. They're here for the quick sats. If they weren't, they'd have setup their own Datum gateway and be using a different pool. If they pre-sell those sats (which will mature in a one month), they'll have to sell them at a discount. Which means it'll be less profitable for them. So that decentivizes what they were trying to do. > In any case, a miner dumping too much of their coin, is never an interesting use case. It would mean that the price could dump also, meaning mining in and of itself is not a lucrative business anymore. Then you have to shutdown your miners. Again, I disagree. I don't care if it's profitable are not, I'll be mining. I don't mind wasting all of the electricity. I also don't mind wasting the cost of the capital for the miner. So if they dump I'll just keep on mining and *also* buy sats for cheaper. > Then you have to shutdown your miners. Difficulty adjustment kicks in again. This whole procedure has been working fine for years. Oh, I see. You actually like the sha256 captured coin. That's why you think this procedure's been working fine for years. So you're okay with what you see on the suitcoin network. I'm -sooo- not okay with it that I gladly forked away from it. So to me, what you say has been working for years is exactly what I'm trying to get away from. So we're coming at this from completely different perspectives. This conversation will go nowhere.

Discord? Really?

IMHO this is lost since the day of the split, and I hate to say that your egos are making things worse. Don’t get me wrong, I was happy running Knots, as I believe it was a powerful signal towards Core to stop the craziness uncapping limits to spam the network and reducing node runners’ ability to make their own choices regarding policies. But the direction the bip110 split is taking is, both from a governance as well as from a mining perspective, something that resembles a lot many other altcoins. I’m also worried by miner centralization in Bitcoin and the role that pools play, but this waste of brainpower and talented and principled bitcoiners just makes me sad.

Core isn't in Bitcoin anymore

Have you started huffing glue or spray paint out of a sock?

Just let it be is the best imo

...that is one of the problems of bitcoin mining? thanks to the fact that high-power miners allow blocks to be mined in a matter of minutes, this encourages there to always be companies or groups that want to monopolize the entire industry. if the rewards are no longer made as frequent as they currently are, that would mean that many mining companies would no longer feel so motivated in wanting to invest a lot of energy and hardware in increasing their mining because the profits would no longer be able to touch them until a certain time, which could put them in financial problems because they would no longer be able to pay immediately. those who gave them money for mining. although, if they decide to add that, it is likely that alphapool and lazarus will decide not to upgrade their miners to apply that because they obviously put in a lot of resources just to have 40 and 18% of the blake2b mining and they are not going to want to lose their daily rewards. so it is likely that they will end up separating themselves from the network indirectly again because it is most likely that the smaller miners are the ones who will decide to apply that

Either of these proposals would fix nothing and make the situation worse.

Take this less seriously than $LAPTOP View quoted note →

It doesn't have to go anywhere bro, all good. I'm just wondering. I dislike the fact that the SHA256 coin has its issues. I'm observing how the manual intervention here will impact the #blake2b coin. I'm not dumping either of the coins, let's see where it goes. If by "forking away" you mean selling all your #SHA256 coins, pointing your node and mining gear to the #blake2b #BTC chain, then hats off to you man. I'm just not there yet, financially speaking. Some of the people in the space, like @npub1s33s...252p , say they will be "DCAing out of suit coin in the next few years". For me, that sounds like waiting for a new ATH.

I would take this as proof that the smartest person can have idiotic thoughts. Greed is a fundamental incentive structure of bitcoin. A feature not a bug to fix!

It’s proof of work.

Well this make this the Most radical shitcoin Bitcoin fork in our history. First switching mining to a pre existing asic built POW and now changing rewards for proof of work? lol proof of work? Change change change it actually don’t work. So change!

Disagree but ok