/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>16097233

>>11908152

Let us take the toy model of two miners discovering blocks in a blockchain as a scenario. Miner A and Miner B each find a block within a small period of time. Peter in his analysis would be correct IF these miners would mine independently of one-another, but, in Bitcoin they do not mine independently.

Miners find a block and then send this to all other miners. When that occurs, the miners start over and mine off the new block. So, to have this, we will have block 0 as the start that all miners have agreed to and, block 1 as the next block discovered by the miners.

In the scenario posited, Alice (A) has found a block at a nominal time, (T=0) and Bob discovers a block at a time very close to this but no more than 20 seconds from when Alice discovered a block at height 1 (that is 0s< T ≤20s).

To understand the process, we need to consider what is happening across the system as a whole, and not the actions of the miners independently. When Alice finds a block, she announces this to all of the other miners she is connected to as quickly as she can. The “First seen rule” in Bitcoin mean that the Block discovered by Alice benefits only if it is seen by other miners. The timestamp on her block does not count unless it is too far out, so we ignore this.

>>11780095

This is what people think it is. This is what Lightning is. It's a mesh. Lots of little hops, central nodes, et cetra.

Red balloons in Bitcoin: a group of Microsoft mathematicians went over and did the mathematics behind sybilling and other things. Any network with a distance of three plus can always be sybilled. Mathematically proven: always. Every time you do it.

That---Lightning---can have eighty hops. Not eight, eighty. That means it is always vulnerable to attacks. Not sometimes. Always. It is mathematically proven. Read the paper; read their results.