<p>This only raises the question of which miners' signatures are considered acceptable.  If anyone can be a miner and provide a signature, then there is no security and no way to objectively determine which of many conflicting blocks is authoritative.  If there is a fixed list of authorized public keys, then the currency is no longer decentralized.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-01-24T07:06:19.420Z
It took your answer for me to understand what the question was. Could you perhaps edit the question?
Murch
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-01-24T05:22:57.700Z
2018-01-24T05:22:57.700Z
Nate Eldredge
<p>As it is understood that arriving nonce is very resource intensive, whether "Digital Signature of the Block by the Miner" can be considered in place of "Nonce"? Its Shortcomings, if not suitable.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-01-26T01:19:22.400Z
You seem to be confused about what the nonce actually achieves. The nonce allows miners to "rehash" the same block multiple times, eventually finding a sufficiently "difficult" block that they can publish and be rewarded for. The nonce is either picked randomly or incremented. This is much faster than a digital signature.
Alin Tomescu
<blockchain><nonce>
Can "Digital Signature of the Block by the Miner" be used in place of "Nonce"?
AVA
# Can "Digital Signature of the Block by the Miner" be used in place of "Nonce"?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2018-01-24)

As it is understood that arriving nonce is very resource intensive, whether "Digital Signature of the Block by the Miner" can be considered in place of "Nonce"? Its Shortcomings, if not suitable.

**Tags:** blockchain, nonce

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: You seem to be confused about what the nonce actually achieves. The nonce allows miners to "rehash" the same block multiple times, eventually finding a sufficiently "difficult" block that they can publish and be rewarded for. The nonce is either picked randomly or incremented. This is much faster than a digital signature.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2018-01-24. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

This only raises the question of which miners' signatures are considered acceptable. If anyone can be a miner and provide a signature, then there is no security and no way to objectively determine which of many conflicting blocks is authoritative. If there is a fixed list of authorized public keys, then the currency is no longer decentralized.

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: It took your answer for me to understand what the question was. Could you perhaps edit the question?  

---

