diff options
author | Peter R <peter_r@gmx.com> | 2015-10-02 09:38:26 -0700 |
---|---|---|
committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2015-10-02 16:38:34 +0000 |
commit | 4cc61a363fb3e85c84c73308cd52bcf85e503102 (patch) | |
tree | a6cf6c9cab58ffe2cea69c26a7684f72e359bbde /64/b59c7f4193f863c5b9d37a1ed2eab8da96a14a | |
parent | 2f17c0078a60724debc1095fe67258d24ebb2d46 (diff) | |
download | pi-bitcoindev-4cc61a363fb3e85c84c73308cd52bcf85e503102.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-4cc61a363fb3e85c84c73308cd52bcf85e503102.zip |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Dev-list's stance on potentially altering the PoW algorithm
Diffstat (limited to '64/b59c7f4193f863c5b9d37a1ed2eab8da96a14a')
-rw-r--r-- | 64/b59c7f4193f863c5b9d37a1ed2eab8da96a14a | 140 |
1 files changed, 140 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/64/b59c7f4193f863c5b9d37a1ed2eab8da96a14a b/64/b59c7f4193f863c5b9d37a1ed2eab8da96a14a new file mode 100644 index 000000000..9faa455d6 --- /dev/null +++ b/64/b59c7f4193f863c5b9d37a1ed2eab8da96a14a @@ -0,0 +1,140 @@ +Return-Path: <peter_r@gmx.com> +Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org + [172.17.192.35]) + by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DAFC41A43 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Fri, 2 Oct 2015 16:38:34 +0000 (UTC) +X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 +Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) + by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C02D2CA + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Fri, 2 Oct 2015 16:38:34 +0000 (UTC) +Received: from [192.168.1.68] ([205.250.126.165]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103) + with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MJjUO-1ZgxQA2mkm-001AEq; + Fri, 02 Oct 2015 18:38:31 +0200 +Content-Type: multipart/alternative; + boundary="Apple-Mail=_B09B6D8E-F20A-4C24-9DFF-87A28D609852" +Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) +From: Peter R <peter_r@gmx.com> +In-Reply-To: <CABm2gDrOt2m6xfYjtVJne6Cm2nawXtA2-a4y7kaEA1fEgkUUUA@mail.gmail.com> +Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 09:38:26 -0700 +Message-Id: <EA4673B8-C895-40F8-A71D-4BD5045A57D8@gmx.com> +References: <CAEgR2PFQtr78B3t147=3Ko4VnTGevb0QCySk=hDSqeFHZk=MPQ@mail.gmail.com> + <CABm2gDrOt2m6xfYjtVJne6Cm2nawXtA2-a4y7kaEA1fEgkUUUA@mail.gmail.com> +To: =?utf-8?Q?Jorge_Tim=C3=B3n?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc> +X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) +X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:Cec5ZZ5mmQN7O7y7Uj4phS4LdJZhsuQDB4IYddVFJHopNYWMEhI + H/tTyLSU8wvBR2lhFLnP8f+HXFPZljSkII4pNgthHGxizyQGHC26DHLAtQJeiaxw9uxRQgt + sc3b+JsRUmgfsBBG937ADzwswGEAFsMCUqOdyJoheVxxYvljhqq7IucRfCG8fcs6HvsJyUI + f2DPYg20CZF/cn32sVNsg== +X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:UDXefhM2E4Q=:U9w5mhGUMIVnOUDjnJPYuB + 0jvHf1w0i0boLCt1fCNGLq7INlF40oYdQ/Yjh9LfOPLwEhABgXLElXvyxz40bNyjMtarSMTFv + 0KsXrarWE/kWyljIC4qDR9iQxBfBT6ffAnhEOiw3ZwJRDHlXCihJNRY3PzHpkEiA7ufOixV0t + hkIDQSu4xHO28JpIktkJf+mfw6HLaSSmr29KqUQHTlbSQJ8Q/VFPia8zVcU+IKwHA1nY4g2GP + KlE5q63MbvAhl+ddLaT9Qju8yhJfsSp2iInTae8DswXVMflhIzgLzJFnv9KEAih+5Ak0RyQXA + SKaylRUc1+AIkLsi8u2iEdVY+/EjrNH64DQAPmdVTNo8T8NLLhog8tIbCrjeuOTxaaoUKXzVZ + xb3tYfLEkKUPhwnqu4ncxfj9hk7rpKMqnN5ljgy9uEWIqGLqmX3bhVnvgRmwCzAzWb1vWk/WT + J9SVojueM3bgml4afi/q3fjTYqzJCiIOu1n1OUL7ND+mx1cG550T8OXsSOztSWI/l5AybKjkh + 9s+SFBVzz9SIMfcI47yD2D2lkgu6tQ6TpNsP+6lBWdPUThw/091mY3yz3FTSBvbz02fswYs7J + X5EtdHfKnCR4T2YqUFt5jm1PW4ihyd72TAxT1AgiXZ+iIHs3JBcPxMM2Y79wpHZIS59Hw8RXB + 7V/7EgUI4RCze2QBe/nByliJ+2YGjUTQEp8RSGCUYJQW/SnrzUwWW2cq6gMDcnH8RXLI9JQoX + UerMAD9w0nT2bJD14FsIO5D/yUbGGfzURHOEgz0bObzi4RDV0HQ9LZzbzv/YlBYh+lajEZSMD + 5UGNiNq +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, + HTML_MESSAGE, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE, + RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on + smtp1.linux-foundation.org +Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>, + Daniele Pinna <daniele.pinna@gmail.com> +Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Dev-list's stance on potentially altering the PoW + algorithm +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 +Precedence: list +List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org> +List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>, + <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe> +List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/> +List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> +List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help> +List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>, + <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe> +X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2015 16:38:35 -0000 + + +--Apple-Mail=_B09B6D8E-F20A-4C24-9DFF-87A28D609852 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset=utf-8 + +> On Oct 2, 2015, at 1:20 AM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n via bitcoin-dev = +<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: +> On Oct 2, 2015 10:03 AM, "Daniele Pinna via bitcoin-dev" = +<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org = +<mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>> wrote: +> > should an algorithm that guarantees protection from ASIC/FPGA = +optimization be found. +> This is demonstrably impossible: anything that can be done with = +software can be done with hardware. This is computer science 101. And = +specialized hardware can always be more efficient, at least energy-wise. +>=20 +I encourage Alex and Dmitry to consider submitting their paper to = +Ledger, where it will be reviewed objectively and with an open mind. = +The authors have motivated their work, framed it in its scholarly = +context, and made explicit the contributions their paper makes. Their = +manuscript, "Asymmetric proof-of-work based on the Generalized Birthday = +problem," clearly represents a great deal of work by the authors and I = +commend them for their efforts. =20 + +In the link Adam Back provided, Greg Maxwell mentioned that =E2=80=9Cit = +is far from clear that 'memory hardness' is actually a useful goal.=E2=80=9D= + I agree with this statement; however, regardless of whether memory = +hardness turns out to be a useful goal in regards to cryptocurrency or = +not, a paper analyzing memory-hard proof-of-work schemes is certainly = +useful in helping us to figure that out.=20 + +Best regards, +Peter= + +--Apple-Mail=_B09B6D8E-F20A-4C24-9DFF-87A28D609852 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +Content-Type: text/html; + charset=utf-8 + +<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html = +charset=3Dutf-8"></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; = +-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" = +class=3D""><div><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D""><div class=3D"">On = +Oct 2, 2015, at 1:20 AM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n via bitcoin-dev <<a = +href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" = +class=3D"">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>> = +wrote:</div></blockquote><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D""><div = +class=3D"">On Oct 2, 2015 10:03 AM, "Daniele Pinna via bitcoin-dev" = +<<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" = +class=3D"">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>> = +wrote:</div></blockquote><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D""><div = +class=3D"">> should an algorithm that guarantees protection from = +ASIC/FPGA optimization be found.</div><div class=3D""><p dir=3D"ltr" = +class=3D"">This is demonstrably impossible: anything that can be done = +with software can be done with hardware. This is computer science 101. = + And specialized hardware can always be more efficient, at least = +energy-wise.</p></div></blockquote></div>I encourage Alex and Dmitry to = +consider submitting their paper to <i class=3D"">Ledger</i>, where it = +will be reviewed objectively and with an open mind. The authors = +have motivated their work, framed it in its scholarly context, and made = +explicit the contributions their paper makes. Their manuscript, = +"Asymmetric proof-of-work based on the Generalized Birthday problem," = +clearly represents a great deal of work by the authors and I commend = +them for their efforts. <div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div = +class=3D"">In the link Adam Back provided, Greg Maxwell mentioned that = +=E2=80=9Cit is far from clear that 'memory hardness' is actually a = +useful goal.=E2=80=9D I agree with this statement; however, = +regardless of whether memory hardness turns out to be a useful goal in = +regards to cryptocurrency or not, a paper analyzing memory-hard = +proof-of-work schemes is certainly useful in helping us to figure that = +out. </div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">Best = +regards,</div><div class=3D"">Peter</div></body></html>= + +--Apple-Mail=_B09B6D8E-F20A-4C24-9DFF-87A28D609852-- + |