3 ms·
It gets even funnier when you consider that miners may reorder transactions they include in a block as they see fit, and even add their own transactions to fron
by bondarchuk 6y ago
It gets even funnier when you consider that miners may reorder transactions they include in a block as they see fit, and even add their own transactions to front-run others.
https://arxiv.org/abs/1904.05234 https://arxiv.org/abs/1904.05234
- optimiz3 6y agoWhat is the objection? Fees are designed to entice miners to include a transaction. If a fee is too low, the miner will include transactions with better incentives. Recording transactions has real economic cost (mining and permanent storage on the distributed ledger).
- bondarchuk 6y agoI don't have any objection, I just think it's funny.
- DennisP 6y agoEssentially the same thing happens when you trade stocks on Robinhood.
- spurdoman77 6y agoNo, definitely not.
- DennisP 6y agoI was about to reply that the "front-running" has been widely reported, decided I'd better google a source, and came across a fantastic article about how payment-for-order-flow actually works. You're right, it's not front-running, and it gives retail traders a better price than they would have gotten on the market itself. https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-02-05/robinhood-gamestop-saga-pressures-payment-for-order-flow https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-02-05/robinh...
- exo762 6y agoRecently miners started exploiting this possibility for profit. This is a problem in many ways, and this problem is hard to solve. Possible solution involves splitting miner role into two - one group will do sequencing (without knowing much about txes contents), other will do application of txes to the state managed by the chain. There are more radical ways of solving the problem - for instance one can hide all the execution from miners. One example would be ZEXE: https://par.nsf.gov/servlets/purl/10175111 https://par.nsf.gov/servlets/purl/10175111