171–180 of 188 posts
This reminds me of how Steve Jobs would talk about the need for liberal arts influence in technology. I feel like so much of this blockchain and cryptocurrency stuff is made purely looking at the tech, with either no thought to the actual incentives involved, or a total misunderstanding of them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's the official Chia answer to this: https://twitter.com/bramcohen/status/1393988621921701889
> For some odd reason the 'Chia burns out hard drives!' is getting repeated as the fashionable fud. No one is claiming that Chia is burning hard drives. He is intentionally being misleading. Chia absolutely destroys consumer SSDs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A cheaper way to deal with you is to embargo/tariff your exports, until you come back to the negotiating table, hat in hand.
Not sure that always works. Hang on, Fidel Castro is on the other line.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This defeats the purpose of disincentivizing adversaries who want to steal coins from other participants. The stake/spacetime/electricity isn't wasted; it is used to establish global consensus. You can't redirect those resources into "doing some real good in the world" the best you can do is to allocate resources directly to your good cause rather than trying to magically get the good done for free.
> The stake/spacetime/electricity isn't wasted; it is used to establish global consensus. I still would like everyone to understand how proof-of-work really works, I don't think many people do. The current Bitcoin hash rate means that all those miners are currently calculating on the order of 100.000.000.000.000.000.000 hashes per second. Of those, in Bitcoin only around 6 per hour have any actual effect. Six. Those…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The stake/spacetime/electricity isn't wasted; it is used to establish global consensus. I still would like everyone to understand how proof-of-work really works, I don't think many people do. The current Bitcoin hash rate means that all those miners are currently calculating on the order of 100.000.000.000.000.000.000 hashes per second. Of those, in Bitcoin only around 6 per hour have any actual effect. Six. Those…
I’m not sure I see what you’re saying. The “arbitrary target” is so high because of all the mining. If there were less miners, the difficult would decrease, and then it would be easier for a malicious party to find one of those 6 lottery tickets.
It is correct that the difficulty is adjusted based on the hash rate. If mining power was halved, it would become twice as easy to hit the target. If a new ASIC would make calculating hashes twice as efficient, the network would make hitting the target twice as difficult, effectively counteracting the efficiency. The goal is to always have 6 successful calculations per hour on average.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This defeats the purpose of disincentivizing adversaries who want to steal coins from other participants. The stake/spacetime/electricity isn't wasted; it is used to establish global consensus. You can't redirect those resources into "doing some real good in the world" the best you can do is to allocate resources directly to your good cause rather than trying to magically get the good done for free.
> The stake/spacetime/electricity isn't wasted; it is used to establish global consensus. I still would like everyone to understand how proof-of-work really works, I don't think many people do. The current Bitcoin hash rate means that all those miners are currently calculating on the order of 100.000.000.000.000.000.000 hashes per second. Of those, in Bitcoin only around 6 per hour have any actual effect. Six. Those…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reference implementation is Python, so there's lots of room to optimize. I wonder if you can eventually build an ASIC that replaces the disk based lookup with in memory calculations of the same data.
Can you send a link? I'd like to help.
Is this true? Back in 2015, techreport tested a bunch of SSDs to failure and it took 18 months to kill them all. This was a while ago, but I'd been lead to believe write endurance had only improved since then.
https://techreport.com/review/27909/the-ssd-endurance-experi...