What auditability? I thought nostr:nprofile1qqs9pk20ctv9srrg9vr354p03v0rrgsqkpggh2u45va77zz4mu5p6ccpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzv9hxgtcpz4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezummcw3ezuer9wchsz9thwden5te0wfjkccte9ejxzmt4wvhxjme0907cz8 was talking about eliminating miner identity, which prevents eviction of misbehaving miners.
I'm all for anon mining, but pools that allow it now put themselves at risk of block withholding.
I mean the proof of liabilities schema. Publishing all "burned" ecash so clients can validate against it.
Account based eCash or eHash is still private. You know how much you've issued to a specific account but have no way of know when that issuance comes back or who is holding it.
That seems like it could be compatible with banning withholders. Thanks!
There's some activity on this concept. It might even work. 😅
Also, how do you detect block witholding?
You detect it with statistical analysis. If Mallory is excessively unlucky, e.g. she's submitted 3x as many shares as necessary to find a block but none of her shares were blocks, you ban her.
Hmm. I'm no statistician but that sounds imprecise. And ban at the user account level?
It's very imprecise. Worse, it's only useful for individuals who contribute large amounts of hashrate, i.e. those who could reasonably solo mine. nostr:nprofile1qqsvvk9qy7qx2gzed6wazxtureunuxljam66za6yr3p02zc0qhz57jqpzemhxue69uhk2er9dchxummnw3ezumrpdejz7qgcwaehxw309ahx7um5wghxvmt59emkj73wvf5h5tcpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhs0dsl3l makes the point that the difficulty of preventing block withholding could be a significant contributor to limiting pool options: https://mailing-list.bitcoindevs.xyz/bitcoindev/Zp%2FGADXa8J146Qqn@erisian.com.au/
Oddbean new post about login | logout