Which country has the highest percentage of miners? - page 2.

onemorexmr

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 251

Quote from: achow101 on September 28, 2015, 06:41:45 PM

Again, if you had read what I had posted, then you would know that I am assuming that nothing was being done about the fork. Yes I know that modifications to software can be made to not reject the fork and extract the transactions and modifications can be made to continuously broadcast transactions, and that someone will probably do something to fix the problem. BUT as I said earlier, I was assuming that no one was doing anything about it.

ok, then why do you think that nobody will do anything? do you really think that is an likely outcome of a fork?

EDIT: sorry btw. i originally answered VirosaGITS who said that bitcoin will be doomed(tm) in case of such a fork and was arguing about that.

achow101

staff

Activity: 3458

Merit: 6793

Just writing some code

Quote from: onemorexmr on September 28, 2015, 06:36:59 PM

Quote from: achow101 on September 28, 2015, 06:34:15 PM

Quote from: onemorexmr on September 28, 2015, 06:25:50 PM

Quote from: achow101 on September 28, 2015, 06:23:49 PM

Quote from: onemorexmr on September 28, 2015, 06:18:50 PM

they know as soon as both forks merge. miners dont run stock bitcoin. and even now there are people keeping orphaned blocks

How would they know? Those transaction's aren't being broadcast by anyone, and their nodes would immediately reject the forked blockchain? They would need a code change in order to fix that.

Again, the scenario was assuming that nothing would be done. Honestly, if such a situation were to happen, it would probably be very brief and not much damage would be done. Or the someone would spot the problem immediately and someone would do something about it to fix it.

orphaned blocks are not forgotten.
if all just run stock bitcoin and dont do anything this is true: but thats not the case

AFAIK transactions in orphaned blocks are only included in another block because the miner rejects the orphan block so it still has those transactions in its mempool. Miners do not scan orphaned blocks for transactions and then include them in their mempool or blocks. In this scenario, older transactions do not exist in anyone's mempool because either the node is on the wrong side of the fork and never received it, or it has been removed from the mempool because it was already included in a block. If the transaction is not in any node's mempool, then it will no longer be broadcast.

again: you assume that everybody is just running stock bitcoin core and nobody is doing anything.
orphan blocks are not forgotton.
a miner can just save them, extract the transactions from there and put them in his new blocks.

True.

Again, if you had read what I had posted, then you would know that I am assuming that nothing was being done about the fork. Yes I know that modifications to software can be made to not reject the fork and extract the transactions and modifications can be made to continuously broadcast transactions, and that someone will probably do something to fix the problem. BUT as I said earlier, I was assuming that no one was doing anything about it.

onemorexmr

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 251

Quote from: achow101 on September 28, 2015, 06:34:15 PM

Quote from: onemorexmr on September 28, 2015, 06:25:50 PM

Quote from: achow101 on September 28, 2015, 06:23:49 PM

Quote from: onemorexmr on September 28, 2015, 06:18:50 PM

they know as soon as both forks merge. miners dont run stock bitcoin. and even now there are people keeping orphaned blocks

How would they know? Those transaction's aren't being broadcast by anyone, and their nodes would immediately reject the forked blockchain? They would need a code change in order to fix that.

Again, the scenario was assuming that nothing would be done. Honestly, if such a situation were to happen, it would probably be very brief and not much damage would be done. Or the someone would spot the problem immediately and someone would do something about it to fix it.

orphaned blocks are not forgotten.
if all just run stock bitcoin and dont do anything this is true: but thats not the case

AFAIK transactions in orphaned blocks are only included in another block because the miner rejects the orphan block so it still has those transactions in its mempool. Miners do not scan orphaned blocks for transactions and then include them in their mempool or blocks. In this scenario, older transactions do not exist in anyone's mempool because either the node is on the wrong side of the fork and never received it, or it has been removed from the mempool because it was already included in a block. If the transaction is not in any node's mempool, then it will no longer be broadcast.

again: you assume that everybody is just running stock bitcoin core and nobody is doing anything.
orphan blocks are not forgotton.
a miner can just save them, extract the transactions from there and put them in his new blocks.

achow101

staff

Activity: 3458

Merit: 6793

Just writing some code

Quote from: onemorexmr on September 28, 2015, 06:25:50 PM

Quote from: achow101 on September 28, 2015, 06:23:49 PM

Quote from: onemorexmr on September 28, 2015, 06:18:50 PM

they know as soon as both forks merge. miners dont run stock bitcoin. and even now there are people keeping orphaned blocks

How would they know? Those transaction's aren't being broadcast by anyone, and their nodes would immediately reject the forked blockchain? They would need a code change in order to fix that.

Again, the scenario was assuming that nothing would be done. Honestly, if such a situation were to happen, it would probably be very brief and not much damage would be done. Or the someone would spot the problem immediately and someone would do something about it to fix it.

orphaned blocks are not forgotten.
if all just run stock bitcoin and dont do anything this is true: but thats not the case

AFAIK transactions in orphaned blocks are only included in another block because the miner rejects the orphan block so it still has those transactions in its mempool. Miners do not scan orphaned blocks for transactions and then include them in their mempool or blocks. In this scenario, older transactions do not exist in anyone's mempool because either the node is on the wrong side of the fork and never received it, or it has been removed from the mempool because it was already included in a block. If the transaction is not in any node's mempool, then it will no longer be broadcast.

onemorexmr

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 251

Quote from: achow101 on September 28, 2015, 06:23:49 PM

Quote from: onemorexmr on September 28, 2015, 06:18:50 PM

they know as soon as both forks merge. miners dont run stock bitcoin. and even now there are people keeping orphaned blocks

How would they know? Those transaction's aren't being broadcast by anyone, and their nodes would immediately reject the forked blockchain? They would need a code change in order to fix that.

Again, the scenario was assuming that nothing would be done. Honestly, if such a situation were to happen, it would probably be very brief and not much damage would be done. Or the someone would spot the problem immediately and someone would do something about it to fix it.

orphaned blocks are not forgotten.
if all just run stock bitcoin and dont do anything this is true: but thats not the case

achow101

staff

Activity: 3458

Merit: 6793

Just writing some code

Quote from: onemorexmr on September 28, 2015, 06:18:50 PM

they know as soon as both forks merge. miners dont run stock bitcoin. and even now there are people keeping orphaned blocks

How would they know? Those transaction's aren't being broadcast by anyone, and their nodes would immediately reject the forked blockchain? They would need a code change in order to fix that.

Again, the scenario was assuming that nothing would be done. Honestly, if such a situation were to happen, it would probably be very brief and not much damage would be done. Or the someone would spot the problem immediately and someone would do something about it to fix it.

onemorexmr

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 251

imagine this:

we have a chain split between china and rest of the world.
i offer a service: i drive to china daily with an usb stick containing all transactions (back and forth)

now both chains can include all transactions.
exchanges that use my service may have a confirmation delay of one day to be sure their transaction is in both chains

problem solved?

onemorexmr

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 251

Quote from: achow101 on September 28, 2015, 06:17:03 PM

Quote from: onemorexmr on September 28, 2015, 06:11:11 PM

Quote from: achow101 on September 28, 2015, 06:09:32 PM

Quote from: onemorexmr on September 28, 2015, 06:00:57 PM

Quote from: VirosaGITS on September 28, 2015, 05:57:33 PM

No its a extremely huge problem. People don't know *which* fork will be validated later on, the transaction from the destroyed fork will be invalidated, and will never get confirmed in the chain that survive.

What will everyone do if that happen? They will dump it down to 10 cents in one hour.

why not? as i said they are already signed and miners can just pick them up

No one is actively broadcasting those transactions. By the time the forks combine, the transactions confirmed in one fork would no longer be unconfirmed, and thus no longer broadcast. When the forks combine, the nodes on one fork would not know of those transactions and would not ask for them, and the nodes on the other fork would not know to broadcast them. Thus those transactions are essentially dropped and forgotten.

i expect miners to pick transactions up from the lost fork. for the same reason they are putting transactions in a block right now: to get their fees

They can't. They don't know those transactions exist because no one is broadcasting them. The other nodes don't know that the other nodes don't have those transactions, so they aren't broadcasting them. Thus no one is broadcasting those transactions and thus those transactions that were lost will never be included.

This is assuming that nothing is done by the devs to deal with said fork. I believe that Bitcoin Core will go into safe mode if it detects a fork and the devs will probably issue an alert regarding said fork.

they know as soon as both forks merge. miners dont run stock bitcoin. and even now there are people keeping orphaned blocks

achow101

staff

Activity: 3458

Merit: 6793

Just writing some code

Quote from: onemorexmr on September 28, 2015, 06:11:11 PM

Quote from: achow101 on September 28, 2015, 06:09:32 PM

Quote from: onemorexmr on September 28, 2015, 06:00:57 PM

Quote from: VirosaGITS on September 28, 2015, 05:57:33 PM

No its a extremely huge problem. People don't know *which* fork will be validated later on, the transaction from the destroyed fork will be invalidated, and will never get confirmed in the chain that survive.

What will everyone do if that happen? They will dump it down to 10 cents in one hour.

why not? as i said they are already signed and miners can just pick them up

No one is actively broadcasting those transactions. By the time the forks combine, the transactions confirmed in one fork would no longer be unconfirmed, and thus no longer broadcast. When the forks combine, the nodes on one fork would not know of those transactions and would not ask for them, and the nodes on the other fork would not know to broadcast them. Thus those transactions are essentially dropped and forgotten.

i expect miners to pick transactions up from the lost fork. for the same reason they are putting transactions in a block right now: to get their fees

They can't. They don't know those transactions exist because no one is broadcasting them. The other nodes don't know that the other nodes don't have those transactions, so they aren't broadcasting them. Thus no one is broadcasting those transactions and thus those transactions that were lost will never be included.

This is assuming that nothing is done by the devs to deal with said fork. I believe that Bitcoin Core will go into safe mode if it detects a fork and the devs will probably issue an alert regarding said fork.

onemorexmr

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 251

Quote from: achow101 on September 28, 2015, 06:09:32 PM

Quote from: onemorexmr on September 28, 2015, 06:00:57 PM

Quote from: VirosaGITS on September 28, 2015, 05:57:33 PM

No its a extremely huge problem. People don't know *which* fork will be validated later on, the transaction from the destroyed fork will be invalidated, and will never get confirmed in the chain that survive.

What will everyone do if that happen? They will dump it down to 10 cents in one hour.

why not? as i said they are already signed and miners can just pick them up

No one is actively broadcasting those transactions. By the time the forks combine, the transactions confirmed in one fork would no longer be unconfirmed, and thus no longer broadcast. When the forks combine, the nodes on one fork would not know of those transactions and would not ask for them, and the nodes on the other fork would not know to broadcast them. Thus those transactions are essentially dropped and forgotten.

i expect miners to pick transactions up from the lost fork. for the same reason they are putting transactions in a block right now: to get their fees

onemorexmr

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 251

Quote from: VirosaGITS on September 28, 2015, 06:05:56 PM

Quote from: onemorexmr on September 28, 2015, 06:00:57 PM

Quote from: VirosaGITS on September 28, 2015, 05:57:33 PM

No its a extremely huge problem. People don't know *which* fork will be validated later on, the transaction from the destroyed fork will be invalidated, and will never get confirmed in the chain that survive.

What will everyone do if that happen? They will dump it down to 10 cents in one hour.

why not? as i said they are already signed and miners can just pick them up

No they can't. For example block X get mined on fork #1, it include XYZ transaction, that fund then get used later on, its on block X2.

Meanwhile the same happen on Fork #2, the same block has been found by someone else and fund are already moved are spent on fork #2 and it include different transaction. All those transaction can't be validated since the funds cannot be used twice. And destroyed transaction aren't returned to the mempool to be retried.

Instead the block chain repair itself and after the forks return to one chain, every fund that was spent on the other (destroyed) chain will be back to where it was when the fork happened.

Which means no one can put FIAT value on it since they don't know if the transaction done at the time will be validated.

that is only true if some party tries an malicous doublespent. in that case you are right.
but you should not assume that all bitcoin users are thieves. in case of a large split exchanges and other services will find ways to detect that (which probably means way longer conf-times on both chains than we are used to atm)

edit: btw this assumes that someone is able to broadcast a tx in both forks. if there is an internet connection between two forks there will be no fork at all

achow101

staff

Activity: 3458

Merit: 6793

Just writing some code

Quote from: onemorexmr on September 28, 2015, 06:00:57 PM

Quote from: VirosaGITS on September 28, 2015, 05:57:33 PM

No its a extremely huge problem. People don't know *which* fork will be validated later on, the transaction from the destroyed fork will be invalidated, and will never get confirmed in the chain that survive.

What will everyone do if that happen? They will dump it down to 10 cents in one hour.

why not? as i said they are already signed and miners can just pick them up

No one is actively broadcasting those transactions. By the time the forks combine, the transactions confirmed in one fork would no longer be unconfirmed, and thus no longer broadcast. When the forks combine, the nodes on one fork would not know of those transactions and would not ask for them, and the nodes on the other fork would not know to broadcast them. Thus those transactions are essentially dropped and forgotten.

VirosaGITS

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1068

Quote from: onemorexmr on September 28, 2015, 06:00:57 PM

Quote from: VirosaGITS on September 28, 2015, 05:57:33 PM

No its a extremely huge problem. People don't know *which* fork will be validated later on, the transaction from the destroyed fork will be invalidated, and will never get confirmed in the chain that survive.

What will everyone do if that happen? They will dump it down to 10 cents in one hour.

why not? as i said they are already signed and miners can just pick them up

No they can't. For example block X get mined on fork #1, it include XYZ transaction, that fund then get used later on, its on block X2.

Meanwhile the same happen on Fork #2, the same block has been found by someone else and fund are already moved are spent on fork #2 and it include different transaction. All those transaction can't be validated since the funds cannot be used twice. And destroyed transaction aren't returned to the mempool to be retried.

Instead the block chain repair itself and after the forks return to one chain, every fund that was spent on the other (destroyed) chain will be back to where it was when the fork happened.

Which means no one can put FIAT value on it since they don't know if the transaction done at the time will be validated.

onemorexmr

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 251

Quote from: VirosaGITS on September 28, 2015, 05:57:33 PM

No its a extremely huge problem. People don't know *which* fork will be validated later on, the transaction from the destroyed fork will be invalidated, and will never get confirmed in the chain that survive.

What will everyone do if that happen? They will dump it down to 10 cents in one hour.

why not? as i said they are already signed and miners can just pick them up

VirosaGITS

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1068

Quote from: onemorexmr on September 28, 2015, 05:55:19 PM

Quote from: VirosaGITS on September 28, 2015, 05:49:39 PM

Quote from: unholycactus on September 28, 2015, 04:04:32 PM

Quote from: achow101 on September 25, 2015, 08:32:37 PM

Quote from: pilscoop on September 25, 2015, 08:13:23 PM

Can this affect the network in any way?

Most of the hashrate is in china. If china were to someone block the miners from connecting to the network, that could be disastrous since we would be losing over half of the hashrate

How is losing hash rate "disastrous"? It wouldn't be nice but it would be very far from disastrous.

That much hash rate overnight would crash the block chain, people would mass dump, it would take a long time to recover, if ever. Its obligatory because if they would reconnected, the two BTC fork would crash and the lesser would get destroyed. Basically if that much hashrate split, BTC is done.

if bitcoin looses half its hashrate that means 20min blocks: not too bad
a bigger problem with a fork and the merge afterwards are "lost" transactions. but they are already signed and miners will pick them up. this leaves the potential for doublespends though: which is a problem. if miners are clever they can mitigate that risk by ignoring all transactions which spent outputs already spent in the losing fork

No its a extremely huge problem. People don't know *which* fork will be validated later on, the transaction from the destroyed fork will be invalidated, and will never get confirmed in the chain that survive.

What will everyone do if that happen? They will dump it down to 10 cents in one hour.

onemorexmr

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 251

Quote from: VirosaGITS on September 28, 2015, 05:49:39 PM

Quote from: unholycactus on September 28, 2015, 04:04:32 PM

Quote from: achow101 on September 25, 2015, 08:32:37 PM

Quote from: pilscoop on September 25, 2015, 08:13:23 PM

Can this affect the network in any way?

Most of the hashrate is in china. If china were to someone block the miners from connecting to the network, that could be disastrous since we would be losing over half of the hashrate

How is losing hash rate "disastrous"? It wouldn't be nice but it would be very far from disastrous.

That much hash rate overnight would crash the block chain, people would mass dump, it would take a long time to recover, if ever. Its obligatory because if they would reconnected, the two BTC fork would crash and the lesser would get destroyed. Basically if that much hashrate split, BTC is done.

if bitcoin looses half its hashrate that means 20min blocks: not too bad
a bigger problem with a fork and the merge afterwards are "lost" transactions. but they are already signed and miners will pick them up. this leaves the potential for doublespends though: which is a problem. if miners are clever they can mitigate that risk by ignoring all transactions which spent outputs already spent in the losing fork

VirosaGITS

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1068

Quote from: unholycactus on September 28, 2015, 04:04:32 PM

Quote from: achow101 on September 25, 2015, 08:32:37 PM

Quote from: pilscoop on September 25, 2015, 08:13:23 PM

Can this affect the network in any way?

Most of the hashrate is in china. If china were to someone block the miners from connecting to the network, that could be disastrous since we would be losing over half of the hashrate

How is losing hash rate "disastrous"? It wouldn't be nice but it would be very far from disastrous.

That much hash rate overnight would crash the block chain, people would mass dump, it would take a long time to recover, if ever. Its obligatory because if they would reconnected, the two BTC fork would crash and the lesser would get destroyed. Basically if that much hashrate split, BTC is done.

unholycactus

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1024

Quote from: achow101 on September 25, 2015, 08:32:37 PM

Quote from: pilscoop on September 25, 2015, 08:13:23 PM

Can this affect the network in any way?

Most of the hashrate is in china. If china were to someone block the miners from connecting to the network, that could be disastrous since we would be losing over half of the hashrate

How is losing hash rate "disastrous"? It wouldn't be nice but it would be very far from disastrous.

Raimonn

legendary

Activity: 1470

Merit: 1001

I think that its China, and its about electricity price. Japan has higher prices of electricity. There are more countries with low electricity cost, but don't have good internet connections.

smith coins

hero member

Activity: 504

Merit: 500

The country that has the electricity cheap is China,
As far as i know a good percentage is covered by hydro centrals and it is cheap.
The mining rigs are also produced in china so it is cheap to use/mine in the same country.

Topic: Which country has the highest percentage of miners? - page 2. (Read 3316 times)