85 minute block interval following last weeks difficulty adjustmentwww.coindesk.com/business/2022/10/17/bitcoin-fails-to-produce-1-block-for-over-an-hour/
149 sats \ 6 comments \ @ln123 17 Oct 2022 bitcoin
write
preview
related posts
100 sats \ 5 replies \ @ln123 OP 17 Oct 2022
The whole point of the difficulty adjustment is to slow down block production, so whilst this was particularly long, it doesn't sound particularly strange.
Also the longer block would keep accruing transactions, making it more and more profitable to mine..
reply
132 sats \ 4 replies \ @ek 17 Oct 2022
Would it? Yes, more and more transactions would come in with higher fees. But do miners consistently include the transactions with the highest fees while mining? So the block template pretty much changes all the time while mining a block? For some reason, this feels weird even though I am sure this is no different than just enumerating a number until a correct hash is found while keeping the included transactions fixed ...
reply
1100 sats \ 2 replies \ @k00b 18 Oct 2022
The answer to most of these questions, given is Bitcoin’s design, is the same as: would I do this if I were a miner or writing mining software? I’m 95% certain miners put the highest fee txs in their block template as they come in. They’re doing the work anyway, why not maximize your returns? In PoW your likelihood of mining a block is independent of the last hash you made, so incrementing the nonce, replacing a tx, or replacing all txs before you hash the header again, all have the same odds of finding the block. Ie you don’t make progress as you mine, you merely exhaust a very very tiny few of possible losing blocks as you go - all that matters is you don’t choose the exact same block again. Eg if I flip a coin and it’s tails, the odds of it being tails on the next flip is still 50% regardless of whether I flip it tomorrow, or on the moon, or on a hill, or in a valley.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ln123 OP 18 Oct 2022
Thanks, @k00b! Nicely articulated.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ek 18 Oct 2022
In PoW your likelihood of mining a block is independent of the last hash you made, so incrementing the nonce, replacing a tx, or replacing all txs before you hash the header again, all have the same odds of finding the block.
Ah, I see. Thanks for confirming that this is indeed the case. I wasn't so sure even though I read something similar already.
Probability is not so intuitive sometimes, haha
reply
223 sats \ 0 replies \ @ln123 OP 17 Oct 2022
+1000 sats to whoever can give a satisfactory (to me) answer to the above! I'll check back tomorrow..
reply