Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix typo in peer-review-new.md #7

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: gh-pages
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Fix typo in peer-review-new.md #7

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions peer-review/peer-review-new.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ To me, the complaint makes no sense. Nonetheless, I shall now try to explain thi

First, the complaint asks us to consider "burdensome sidechains" which are expensive to run, but profitable.

So imagine that all "sidechain" software costs $5 M / year to run, but "sidiechains" bring in $100 M / year (in txn fee revenue). A solo miner with only 4% of the hashrate would earn $4M from "sidechains" (just 4% of the total $100M). But "sidechains" would cost this miner a fixed $5M. So this miner does not run any sidechains. But conversely, a solo miner with 12% would run sidechains -- they'd pay $5M (fixed) and earn $12. This miner now earns a higher ROI (the $12/$5 ROI blends in with the subsistence ROI he was earning pre-sidechains). Because of sidechains, larger miners are rewarded more.
So imagine that all "sidechain" software costs $5 M / year to run, but "sidechains" bring in $100 M / year (in txn fee revenue). A solo miner with only 4% of the hashrate would earn $4M from "sidechains" (just 4% of the total $100M). But "sidechains" would cost this miner a fixed $5M. So this miner does not run any sidechains. But conversely, a solo miner with 12% would run sidechains -- they'd pay $5M (fixed) and earn $12. This miner now earns a higher ROI (the $12/$5 ROI blends in with the subsistence ROI he was earning pre-sidechains). Because of sidechains, larger miners are rewarded more.

The same problem applies to pools. The pool operators who mine "sidechains", will have an edge over those who do not. Pools which turn down the free money, will not attract Hashers. Therefore, eventually, "running all profitable sidechains" will become an activity that is de facto mandatory.

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -268,4 +268,4 @@ People whose opinion on Drivechain we don't know (please tell us!), plus the fou
### See Also

* [Why Drivechain is Hard to Understand](http://www.drivechain.info/blog/hard-to-understand/) -- Strange quirks of DC that make it different from previous soft forks of Bitcoin.
* (forthcoming) [Conflicts of Interest](/link-forthcoming/) -- Almost everyone who could peer review drivechain, stands to lose a lot of money if it succeeds.
* (forthcoming) [Conflicts of Interest](/link-forthcoming/) -- Almost everyone who could peer review drivechain, stands to lose a lot of money if it succeeds.