Data / Evidence regd "penalties" for not validating blocks (Was: Why Satoshi's temporary anti-spam measure isn't temporary)

Data / Evidence regd "penalties" for not validating blocks (Was: Why Satoshi's temporary anti-spam measure isn't temporary)
From: Sriram Karra @ 2015-07-30  6:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: bitcoin-dev

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 934 bytes --]

On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:23 PM, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev
>
>
> > Miners who don't validate have a habit of bleeding money:   that's the
> > system working as designed.
>
> The information I have currently is that the parties engaging in that
> activity found it to be tremendously profitable, even including losses
> from issues.


This got buried in another thread. Putting it out in case anyone has any
insight.

Does anyone have any data on which of the above two viewpoints is actually
correct? Measuring / publishing these effects will go a long way in either
(a) establishing credibility of the 'system design' or (b) trigger a
conversation on what needs fixing.

If there is no such known data, and someone new to Bitcoin would like to do
that, where would be a good place to start, if it is at all possible.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1561 bytes --]

 permalink raw reply	[|nested]