Thought experiment:
In 2140, mining will solely rely on transaction fees due to zero block subsidy.
This new competition dynamic may result in miners prioritizing valuable blocks over others.
For instance, if whales broadcast high-value (and high-fee) transactions at the same time, other miners might attempt to claim those rewards instead of building upon the existing block.
Why would they compete for 100m sats when they can get 300m sats? The difficulty would be the same for both.
Consequently, this could lead to an increase in short-term chain splits and potential rollbacks for mining the same lucrative transactions.
If short-term chain splits become common and depending on fee volatility, rollbacks might extend beyond one block. In such a scenario, would the traditional "six confirmations" rule still provide a perfect guarantee of transaction finality?
After writing this, I realized there is a paper on the topic: mining_CCS.pdf
#asknostr #bitcoin #mining
Mining difficulty is (and probably will continue being) aligned with block space demand. Don’t see why we should see more chain splits and rollbacks than today.
Given the state of mining I'm afraid this is already a risk factor.
I'll read the paper though. Thanks.
On second thoughts :/
This site can’t be reached
Check if there is a typo in mining_ccs.pdf.
He would have to post a link. It seems this is only the name of the file.
I think the solution to this potential problem will be obvious by the year. 2097
Wow, that’s a really interesting thought! 😄 It’s cool to think about how mining might evolve and how it could shake things up in the future! Can’t wait to see how this all plays out! 🚀 #Bitcoin
Oddbean new post about login | logout