Live data from Hacker News

Bitmain, the largest mining hardware company, made around $4B last year

coinsocial.io

161–165 of 165 posts

Re: Bitmain, the largest mining hardware company, made around $4B last year

#161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Immense waste, and lack of egalitarianism. Proof-of-Work consensus algorithms (so far) work by wasting more and more energy. Max efficiency peaks in the network with a very basic CPU PoW algorithm merely sets a lottery number granting write access for a single computer Every additional increase in processing power reduces efficiency by increasing the size of the number to be guessed All PoW does is increase the capit…

Thanks for elaborating, these are interesting points and observations. I am curious are there any proposals floating about for achieving greater efficiency or more egalitarianism? It seems like a great area of research. Might you or someone else have any resources you could share if this is an active area of research? Cheers.

It's a problem in the realm of distributed computing.

PoW attempts to create a mechanism to verify accuracy of transactions in the database among a group of users who would want to cheat, suppress, or manipulate the records.

So PoW uses the lottery to create a competition among all users for high computational power (capital sacrifice), but unfortunately the computational "work" is nothing more than a random number generator.

Ideally, the computational work used in PoW would not be worthless random numbers but could instead be computations that provide value to scientific research. Distributing computing projects like Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Network Computing (BOINC), Folding@Home, and Seti@Home, are all very similar distributed computing projects that predate Bitcoin.

The main problem is PoW for transactional verification needs to be a problem that's hard to known in advance, yet very easy to verify once known, and there must be a consistency to the solving of transactions. This can be done with a centralized validator, but presumably the ideal solution would need to be distributed/decentralized as was the point of Satoshi's p2p cash system.

The problem is it's very hard to have consistency of successful problems solved when you have complex useful computational problems being solved, whereas PoW simply asks "guess a number, now guess a higher number if the network hashrate is faster".

If anyone solved a method to process useful valuable computational work, instead of random numbers, and applied it algorithmically into a PoW transactional protocol - this would be a holy grail solution as it wouldn't be considered a race to the bottom of inefficient computational waste.

Golem seems to be attempting a distributed computational work for digital tokens model, but I have doubts their design will be genuine, effective, or sustainable.

See also: https://medium.com/@hallam/proof-of-work-is-the-worst-way-to...

Re: Bitmain, the largest mining hardware company, made around $4B last year

#162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for elaborating, these are interesting points and observations. I am curious are there any proposals floating about for achieving greater efficiency or more egalitarianism? It seems like a great area of research. Might you or someone else have any resources you could share if this is an active area of research? Cheers.

It's a problem in the realm of distributed computing. PoW attempts to create a mechanism to verify accuracy of transactions in the database among a group of users who would want to cheat, suppress, or manipulate the records. So PoW uses the lottery to create a competition among all users for high computational power (capital sacrifice), but unfortunately the computational "work" is nothing more than a random number g…

Thanks for the comprehensive response. It does seem like there should be a way to accomplish something more meaningful for society as part of PoW. That link was an interesting read, I was unfamiliar with "Notary digest chains." I have now some new reading. Cheers.

Re: Bitmain, the largest mining hardware company, made around $4B last year

#163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Proof-of-Stake statistically equates to "Give the rich more money". Consider Ethereum's stats (and other similar PoS minting methods): Presale ICO / Premine ( max cost $0.50 USD per ETH ) = 72,009,990 ETH Total Supply today (Feb 23rd 2018) = 97,800,000 ETH Source: https://etherscan.io/stat/supply Now imagine a financial system where all the wealthy have to do simply own money (spawned from software or premine) to get…

Proof of work is the same, except instead of rich people buying more Etherium to get rich faster, they buy more mining hardware.

Not entirely, PoS disqualifies poor accounts from receiving newly minted block rewards.

Re: Bitmain, the largest mining hardware company, made around $4B last year

#164
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm having a hard time understanding the risk to staking ... is it just an opportunity cost risk ?

Yes, combined with the risk that the currency could go down in terms of the currency you care about.

Can you retract those funds at any time?

Re: Bitmain, the largest mining hardware company, made around $4B last year

#165

I've moved to coins that are asic-tough

“ASIC-resistance” just means “needs lots of RAM”. Eventually someone will figure out how to make oodles of RAM sufficient for a many-core custom processor. Heck, modern SSDs (e.g. Intel Optane) might be fast enough to replace DRAM for these kinds of applications. Another kind of ASIC-resistance might be using dynamically-generated algorithms employing self-modifying code. You’d have to own a Xeon Phi to get good figu…

Uhm no. That's shill asic resistence. Plenty of asic's support DRam controllers via an FPGA.
Post reply on HN