它不必是那么破坏性的变更。新节点可以在很长一段时间内继续接受旧交易，直到多数节点已升级，再开始拒绝没有 PoW 的交易。或者，它们可以永远接受旧交易，但每个时间段只限一定数量。
It doesn't have to be such a breaking change. New nodes could accept old transactions for a long time until most nodes have already upgraded before starting to refuse transactions without PoW. Or, they could always accept old transactions, but only a limited number per time period.
我想过很多次给交易加 PoW，但通常想来想去，觉得 0.01 手续费本质上与之相似且更好。0.01 基本就是一份工作量证明，但不是浪费。不过如果问题出在验证大量交易上，那 PoW 的验证可以更快。
I've thought about PoW on transactions many times, but usually I end up thinking a 0.01 transaction fee is essentially similar and better. 0.01 is basically a proof of work, but not wasted. But if the problem is validating loads of transactions, then PoW could be checked faster.
一种能缓解多类问题的办法，是实现前面提到的想法：检测收到区块的频率是否出现了不太可能由偶然因素造成的骤降。这样攻击者仍需要掌握网络算力的相当部分，才能从 DoS 攻击中获益。
A more general umbrella partial solution would be to implement the idea where an unlikely dropoff in blocks received is detected. Then an attacker would still need a substantial portion of the network's power to benefit from a DoS attack.
其他参与者原话gavinandresen原帖 ↗Bitcoin 的 p2p 网络容易受到各种拒绝服务攻击。
Bitcoin's p2p network is subject to various kinds of denial of service attacks.
好了，我把话说出来了。
There, I said it.
+1
+1
此刻任何演示性测试都只能证明我们已知的东西，还会把开发时间从强化系统挪去救火。
Any demonstration tests at this point would only show what we already know, and divert dev time from strengthening the system to operational fire fighting.
当前版本尚未建立逐条校对状态记录。来源核验、历史审校与当前译文校对是不同事项。
译文内容版本：4aa1bf578f9e。用于比对文本，不代表校对等级或更新时间。
请填写对应原文、现译文、建议译法和理由。复制后通过你联系本站作者的渠道提交；此处不会自动发送。
Where is the separate discussion devoted to possible Bitcoin weaknesses.
