pull down to refresh

Why are there never any stale blocks anymore, and why wait 6 blocks?
2013 sats \ 6 comments \ @joda 1 Feb bitcoin
zaps forwarded to @OpenSats (100%)
Simultaneously-created valid blocks just don't happen anymore. Is this a result of large mining operations consolidating hash power?
Given that we never see even two valid blocks forking, why bother with SIX blocks? If your transaction was included on a block and there is no competing block being built on, then that's it-- you're permanently in the chain.
write
preview
related posts
525 sats \ 1 reply \ @nerd2ninja 1 Feb freebie
In "Related posts" you have one from @k00b that literally says "Bitcoin had a 2 block chain split at height 788686
https://forkmonitor.info/stale/788686
And look those are really rare, but 1 block reorgs are much more common "There are 2 blocks at height 827853" https://forkmonitor.info/nodes/btc
But like, yeah they're rare and a 2 block reorg is big news, but 6 confs is an old best practice that still gets quoted around.
Another consideration that plebs don't need to worry about, is if the size of the transaction is more than the cost to bribe miners (more fees paid out of band than in band) and/or the cost to run those miners yourself (which is a lot of freaking money) to reorg a number of blocks (with 2x the cost with every block) then there is a hypothetical risk that the payer might find it worthwhile to pay all of that money if they believe it means they'll get more money back as a result.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @joda OP 1 Feb
thanks for the link; I was looking for something just like that and couldn't find it.
I didn't even think about conflicting transactions in the mempool, but they've got to be mostly fee bumps and not double-spend attempts. My guess is even the double-spend attempts are not malicious; they're just people whose transaction hasn't gone through yet so they try again.
Yah I don't know if there's black market for bribing miners, but man that's got to cost a lot of money and it still isn't going to work most of the time.
reply
15 sats \ 1 reply \ @hodlpleb 1 Feb
the time you don't wait is the time that it's going to fork
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @joda OP 1 Feb
Even if it forked, there's no way the next blocks are ALSO found at the same time. And even IF it did, your transaction just goes back to the mempool and gets confirmed anyway, unless your sophisticated nemesis is out there trying to replace that transaction.
reply
31 sats \ 0 replies \ @0xbitcoiner 1 Feb
This is in case the network is under a very serious attack. 6 confirmations may not even be enough in an extreme situation. I can't find it right now, but I remember a website that allowed you to calculate the probability of double spending given a hashrate and number of confirmations.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @premitive1 1 Feb
this always depends on your purposes. if you're in a hurry to complete a large transaction, you may have to put up some collateral. If you're not in a hurry, why not wait six blocks?
reply