# NoM as P2P mining infrastructure for Bitcoin

**URL:** https://forum.hypercore.one/t/nom-as-p2p-mining-infrastructure-for-bitcoin/239
**Category:** Development
**Created:** [November 21, 2023, 9:44am UTC](https://forum.hypercore.one/t/nom-as-p2p-mining-infrastructure-for-bitcoin/239 "2023-11-21T09:44:50Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![aliencoder](https://forum.hypercore.one/user_avatar/forum.hypercore.one/aliencoder/32/49_2.png) [@aliencoder](https://forum.hypercore.one/u/aliencoder)
#### Post date: [November 21, 2023, 9:44am UTC](https://forum.hypercore.one/t/nom-as-p2p-mining-infrastructure-for-bitcoin/239/1 "2023-11-21T09:44:51Z")

</div>

Inspired by the discussion for dynamic Plasma, I’m coming up with a brand new development that seeks to decentralize the mining pools found in Bitcoin.

Every use in NoM can act like a “solo-miner” and use PoW to generate Plasma and issue feeless transactions.

I’m thinking out loud now: is it possible to recycle this PoW and mine actual Bitcoin?

I’ve come across [Braidpool](https://blog.opdup.com/2021/06/30/can-braidpool-reuse-p2pool-components.html), a new concept that seems to check all the boxes:

1. A peer to peer network of miners to disseminate shares:  
We already have a p2p network of “miners”: they are the users of NoM.

2. A rewards calculation algorithm that incentivizes miners to disseminate them at the earliest.  
Very interesting because we already have this mechanism: you want your transaction to be issued as soon as possible.

3. Payment channels to make payouts to miners so that a constant amount of blockspace is required, independent of the number of participating miners.  
Here’s where PTLCs come into play.

4. An anonymous hub that can’t deny rewards payouts to miners.  
Can Pillars be those anonymous hubs? They already issue payouts for hundreds of delegators.

> In P2Pool the network difficulty is adjusted so that the pool finds one share every 30 seconds. This results in smaller miners struggling to find enough share and makes P2Pool economically nonviable for them. In Braidpool, this is not the case. Each miner participating in Braidpool can choose the difficulty they mine at so that they generate a share at an interval of their choosing. Small miners will mine at low difficulty to generate a share every 10 seconds, while large miners will mine at a much larger difficulty to find a share every 10 seconds. Both the difficulty and the share period can be configured by the miner.

I’m remembering some parts of the whitepaper that compares Pillars to mining pools. Is the whitepaper so forward thinking? The more I read, the more interesting those ideas become… I’m trying to connect some dots here.

We should definitely explore this subject.

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.hypercore.one/t/nom-as-p2p-mining-infrastructure-for-bitcoin/239)._