Nodes using the redlist would still have to comprise a sizable portion of the network. And the only incentive to run the modified software would be force of law. This may work as an incentive not mentioned: Government subsidies to pools running the modified software, with a portion given to miners. Since the majority of miners are only mining for profit, they would congregate at these pools.
They don't even have to be government subsidies. Any entity (corporation, state, coalition, etc.) could offer payment to pool owners in exchange for using their particular redlist. Don't forget that most of the hashing power belongs to people who are only mining for profit. So essentially, the largest bidder would decide what the redlist is.
Topic: Bitcoin with Redlisting (Read 881 times)
"Operational Distributed Regulation for Bitcoin"
by Dinesh, Erlich, Gilfoyle, Jared, Richard, Johan Pouwelse
1) Hard to believe it took this many students to write 9 pages.
2) I understand why these students wanted to remain anonymous.
3) We need to keep an eye on Johan Pouwelse as he is obviously an "up and comer" in the area of destroying the fungibility of Bitcoin and therefore Bitcoin itself.
by Dinesh, Erlich, Gilfoyle, Jared, Richard, Johan Pouwelse
1) Hard to believe it took this many students to write 9 pages.
2) I understand why these students wanted to remain anonymous.
3) We need to keep an eye on Johan Pouwelse as he is obviously an "up and comer" in the area of destroying the fungibility of Bitcoin and therefore Bitcoin itself.
i'm not normally one to completely ignore a book based on its "cover", but the very first sentence of this paper gets it so wrong.
"On February 2014, $650.000.000 worth of Bitcoins disappeared."
you mean BTC 650,000 and it didn't all instantaneously disappear. this paper is _awful_. if the authors cannot even get the most basic facts straight about what happened, any conclusions contained inside must be worthless.
"On February 2014, $650.000.000 worth of Bitcoins disappeared."
you mean BTC 650,000 and it didn't all instantaneously disappear. this paper is _awful_. if the authors cannot even get the most basic facts straight about what happened, any conclusions contained inside must be worthless.
http://cryptome.org/2014/06/bitcoin-crypto-justice.pdf
Edit: Cryptome down, so here is another link: http://arxiv-web3.library.cornell.edu/pdf/1406.5440v1
Edit2: I read the paper two times, but I didn't find the part about who will actually control the redlisting.
Edit: Cryptome down, so here is another link: http://arxiv-web3.library.cornell.edu/pdf/1406.5440v1
Edit2: I read the paper two times, but I didn't find the part about who will actually control the redlisting.
Jump to: