Episode #125 of the Stack Overflow podcast is here. We talk Tilde Club and mechanical keyboards. Listen now

New answers tagged

0

Therefore, it is obcioust if other users generate any new block, attacker can ignore it and then genrates a new block with the same height and then outrun all other miniers. This scenario does not reflect how a majority hash attack happens. If the other 40% solve a block before the 60% miner, then they've won. The block cannot be rejected by the 60% ...


0

Miners do optimize the block construction process internally. Unfortunately they do not share this information with the community, so we don't know what methods they use, how they choose TX's and how they distribute work to pool participants. Both mining machines and mining software the big miners use are secret. Modern ASIC machines' hardware are closed ...


4

The stakeholders of bitcoin don't want miners to do that. If miners do that, the stakeholders (the people who are paying for the miners to mine) would change the rules. For example, they'd change the mining algorithm. That would turn the miners expensive ASICs into space heaters (a little faster). Don't miners have way to much power in the current system? ...


2

Simple question really, considering theres a very small group of miners controlling the chain ATM. Miners are distributed around the world, many of them may join the same mining pool to even out the variance in payouts though. Do not confuse the number of mining pools for the number of miners. Really, it is not possible to know the number of distinct mining ...


2

What you are describing is a majority attack which a miner own more than 51% of the hashing power, it has happened once in 2014 but the miner then decided to lower its power to allow the bitcoin to work as intended, you should also notice that the things a miner owning this power can do is limited, see this answer: https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/a/662/...


1

If you want to move all your computational power (hash power) suppose you could just disconnect from your current pool and connect to the other one If you want to divide between different pool I suppose you could just connect to them then use a tactic of process priority to choose how much power you want to devote to each pool depending on its process, for ...


2

Adding more zeroes (more precisely as a prefix) to the required block hash (which is the hash of block header) makes it more difficult because you need to keep hashing the block header until you find a hash value that is less than the required maximum numeric hash value (you update the block header everytime by incrementing the nonce in it which changes the ...


1

I've got the answer http://www.righto.com/2014/02/bitcoin-mining-hard-way-algorithms.html: The key point is that each nonce generates a basically-random hash value. To get a lot of zeroes, you need to try an exponentially large number of nonces.


2

The other miners will not be aware that this malicious miner has find the correct hash(win) since he has not propagate it, so they will still try to find the correct hash and some second later one of them will find it correct and propagate it, then cycle will repeat again without anyone knowing that this malicious miner has win second before the one that has ...


0

The fact that the reward to mine bitcoin will become less and less interesting over time especially in the long run is one of the major threat for bitcoin in the long run, there will be a point when there is gonna be almost no incentive to mine and so the hashing power might decrease rendering a 51% attack easier. There is currently not a true solution but ...


-3

You still have transaction fees. And if the transaction fees will be to high maybe something like that happens: Hard-Fork With less incentive to mine, the transaction fees will drop Switch to PoS that does not cost so much energy ...


3

The resolution of the timestamp in a Bitcoin block header is one second. However, if a miner should find a valid proof-of-work and create a valid block, they do not have to wait one second before starting work on a new block. It is perfectly legal for two successive blocks to have identical timestamps. In fact, it is legal for the succeeding block to have ...


Top 50 recent answers are included