Wait, what? How did I arrive at this conclusion? Ok, so let’s break it down…
There is nothing in the source code that prevents minters to mint on several chains at once. In a custom made Peercoin node, an unspent output could be used in several stakes used on several chains.
The only thing preventing against this disruption of the network, is that honest nodes will not propagate these double blocks (by design it only propagates the first block it sees which prevents double blocks from propagating).
Technically speaking, there is nothing stopping people from starting to run this kind of customized node, where double blocks are purposely being propagated. Accordingly to some, this will happen because Peercoin minters have nothing to loose from doing so because minting on several chains is free of cost in terms of computational power. Since there is no cost, but a potential profit, everyone will do this and that will be the end of Peercoin. Scary right?!
But wait… What happens if someone publishes a version of Bitcoin, where the node can do something very similar: where it can build on several chains, where the creation of blocks requires little computational power? Then the potential for a profit would outweigh the cost of creating blocks, because it would be free. Since its no risk, big reward, everyone on the Bitcoin network will do this. Right? I mean if that kind of logic applies to Peercoin, it applies to Bitcoin as well right?
But, a Bitcoin proponent might argue, that kind of patch doesn’t exist because PoW can never be cost free. Well, actually there is such a patch and its called Proof-of-Stake-without-double-block-check!
It could be called NotBitcoin, and it would be ignored. ???[/quote]
[ol][li]Create a hybridization patch that gradually introduces PoS into Bitcoin. First PoW only, then PoS and PoW at the same time.[/li]
[li]Paste patch on pastebin and put binaries on torrent.[/li]
[li]Launch a viral campaign that “if everyone uses this new enhanced Bitcoin node, then everyone will be able to mine/mint/make $600 coins without special hardware and basically for free (no electricity bill)”[/li]
[li]Wait for enough people to start running the nodes. The patched code lies dormant waiting for block X where it will start to execute. This will even give people with mining equipment a reason to apply the patch, because their expencive ASICs will soon be useless anyway.[/li]
[li]Wait some more, just to be sure. Actually wait until block X ;)[/li]
[li]If enough nodes with this patch have appeared on the network, the network will be susceptible to a hard fork[/li]
[li]Bitcoin will use a hybrid of PoW and PoS.[/li]
[li]Bitcoin will use PoS.[/li]
[li]Peercoin now has some serious competition. Sell sell sell that old dirty coin. Panic.[/li][/ol]
If there are more greedy people then there are non-greedy people, knowing that they can use this patch without it costing them either in hardware or electricity, they will have an incentive to do it and not really any incentive to not do it.
[quote=“jubalix, post:5, topic:2675”]this is just merged mining on another chain, thats not BTC or Peercoin.
there is no issue here[/quote]
Yes perhaps, honestly I know to little about the technical intricacies of the crypto currency stuff to be taken seriously. But, just maybe its not merge mining because the idea I have isn’t about mining on two chains, its building on only one chain. This would of course require a hardfork, so the idea here was that the hardfork should lay dormant for a while before surfacing. If enough nodes were running it, at block X we would find out how many new nodes were doing this.
If I get this right, then a funny thing here is that most ASICs are plugged into mining pools, which means that Bitcoin could have more nodes, but don’t, which makes it easier to add enough patched nodes to overcome the threshold.
It would be interesting to see what BitPay and Coinbase would be running with. Let’s say 75% of the nodes in Bitcoin are running with the patch (ie “accepted” the hardfork) then would the companies go with the majority? (EDIT: My bet is they will stay unhardforked and ignore block from PoWPoS hybrid, since the patch is not originating from Bitcoin core dev comunity and repo. Because they are major gateway to merchants, fiat exchanges etc, this could make PoW “win” and perhaps it tells you something about the whole thing about having a “stake” in something)
Usually this kind of subversion of the network is not thought of as a potential threat, because Bitcoin holders have nothing to gain from doing something that could crash the confidence. But if its “merely” a switch to PoS? I don’t know.
Besides economic incentives etc, are there any technical reason why such a patch could not be made? (EDIT: Would be nice (even if its not vital) if it was possible to do a Proof-of-Double-Block-Prevention in Peercoin. I’m not smart enough to figure out how it would look.)
