đ
Original date posted:2017-10-10
đ Original message:I agree: a new difficulty algorithm starting from zero is inconceivably
rushed. But it's also inconceivable to not have one ready in two months
if my understanding of our current situation is correct. Is there any
complaint or suggestion about this algorithm or the appropriate goals of
an ideal difficulty algorithm? I feel like there is a discussion that needs
to be hashed out before a draft BIP at the HF page, but I do not know
where is best or who would be interested. If the community shows it is
receptive and supportive I think I could get Karbowanek coin to put it
into live action and solicit hash attacks. They are currently using a
simpler N=17 like this since last November. They have tested all my
attempted improvements the past few months, so they are familiar with all
the in and outs.
This particular coin split is looking different. Assuming users currently
prefer SW, it still seems like miner support is going to convince enough
users that SegWit2x is a worthy if not superior alternative. The result
could be both coins oscillating with long delays, as long as the price is
similar. As soon as it is not similar, maybe the loser will be in a death
spiral, pushed to the margin like previous coins. This might be a bitcoin
feature. But the 2016 window seems like it is too brutal. It seems like it
will result in an accidental winner before the better coin can be
determined by more rational means.
Scott Roberts [ARCHIVE] /
npub164âŚznx9p
2023-06-07 20:06:58
in reply to nevent1qâŚ2yul
Author Public Key
npub164d4d9z50r3uzguvlmvwdsevs5t7w6y5hjfz72wkafp0wn72nvfq5znx9pPublished at
2023-06-07 20:06:58Event JSON
{
"id": "92b34d58a2eace230a7d211bea568acdfe7f9521cbcda027f822aa20c7cb3cd8",
"pubkey": "d55b56945478e3c1238cfed8e6c32c8517e76894bc922f29d6ea42f74fca9b12",
"created_at": 1686161218,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"718692ca96522280432185a8b6e5fd2a353038289024a3dda6e31038606dff9e",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"04aa7bd3b9d916fb6e77114094145d0ea539e20dfa5707ef8df1ce5e5e0e713c",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"45fe5a57f42bb740cd879288f26f61d357e7d8ca7c7d97e9dd6278bf2257d1ee"
]
],
"content": "đ
Original date posted:2017-10-10\nđ Original message:I agree: a new difficulty algorithm starting from zero is inconceivably \nrushed. But it's also inconceivable to not have one ready in two months \nif my understanding of our current situation is correct. Is there any \ncomplaint or suggestion about this algorithm or the appropriate goals of \nan ideal difficulty algorithm? I feel like there is a discussion that needs \nto be hashed out before a draft BIP at the HF page, but I do not know \nwhere is best or who would be interested. If the community shows it is \nreceptive and supportive I think I could get Karbowanek coin to put it \ninto live action and solicit hash attacks. They are currently using a \nsimpler N=17 like this since last November. They have tested all my \nattempted improvements the past few months, so they are familiar with all \nthe in and outs. \n\nThis particular coin split is looking different. Assuming users currently \nprefer SW, it still seems like miner support is going to convince enough \nusers that SegWit2x is a worthy if not superior alternative. The result \ncould be both coins oscillating with long delays, as long as the price is \nsimilar. As soon as it is not similar, maybe the loser will be in a death \nspiral, pushed to the margin like previous coins. This might be a bitcoin \nfeature. But the 2016 window seems like it is too brutal. It seems like it \nwill result in an accidental winner before the better coin can be \ndetermined by more rational means.",
"sig": "bf6c17c323696b45c4707d7c7c6698a5262efb90bf6c562b24bdfb5b899586dd3c90006eca0fe3b6078a601fe6fb894a9e584250b9cda044a6694f6dcaf3b2e2"
}