MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CA+YkXXxUdZFYTa1c-F=-FzoQQVtV3GUmE2Okec-zRAD3xS1qAQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMnpzfop8ttqjMAKoS37zpQV6WiZfi1Bn+y_e-HaepTiD4Vm1Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAB0O3SVNyr_t23Y0LyT0mSaf6LONFRLYJ8qzO7rcdJFnrGccFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+YkXXwkSCu=2UOEhzFBzGDHo1c=Ewqsnxp632ke3jdH1ff5WA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+YkXXwfS7eer5Za_ed9tCNdfOp4c3nV_X=mfXzoDxMm6BrizQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <PS2P216MB0914F0B05E1AAB48D9A765609D6D9@PS2P216MB0914.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <PS2P216MB0914F0B05E1AAB48D9A765609D6D9@PS2P216MB0914.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
From: Thomas Hartman <thomashartman1@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2021 10:32:18 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHAXnDW4PFwtSxvfJ8KXipXX2h2w9824=q9ptsTLkrchac2QXA@mail.gmail.com>
To: LORD HIS EXCELLENCY JAMES HRMH <willtech@live.com.au>, 
 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Proposal: Consensus (hard fork) PoST
 Datastore for Energy Efficient Mining
Precedence: list

MY LORD HIS EXCELLENCY:

  It is indeed a contest between free markets and central planning.

  Governments can in effect say, you are permitted to buy energy to
smelt aluminum, but not to mine bitcoin, even if bitcoin is more
profitable.

  To the extent that free markets in energy are suppressed, as you
pointed out in china, bitcoin can indeed be suppressed.

  The solution is not to make bitcoin a centrally managed currency,
but to fight hard for free speech, free markets, and in particular
free markets in energy.

  That being said, bitcoin is designed to thrive even if driven underground=
.

  Your humble subject etc.


On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 9:41 AM LORD HIS EXCELLENCY JAMES HRMH via
bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> Good Afternoon,
>
> It is obvious that something needs to be done to curtail the current cost=
 of mining in kWh per block. I understand proposals are rejected because it=
 is considered censorship and Bitcoin has a consensus to allow anyone to mi=
ne but, since mining requires specific hardware and energy requirements it =
is already a form of censorship where most on the planet except for the top=
 6% I am guessing here, cannot afford to mine. Without affecting the curren=
t algorithm, I have previously begun to explore the process by which mining=
 can be turned into a lottery with only authorized payto addresses able to =
mine valid blocks, since transaction fees and block rewards exist to pay th=
e miner. It would be better even if the algorithms are improved if there ar=
e some ways that only a subset of miners can produce valid blocks for any g=
iven period, say for 12 months with four groups starting three months apart=
 to transition, and maybe limit mining to 50 people per continent to produc=
e valid blocks at any one time. Possibly this requires a consortium to over=
see the lottery but it is something Bitcoin can handle themselves, and woul=
d do better to handle than to wait for government intervention as we have s=
een previously in China where power was too cheap Bitcoin was banned entire=
ly.
>
> KING JAMES HRMH
> Great British Empire
>
> Regards,
> The Australian
> LORD HIS EXCELLENCY JAMES HRMH (& HMRH)
> of Hougun Manor & Glencoe & British Empire
> MR. Damian A. James Williamson
> Wills
>
> et al.
>
>
> Willtech
> www.willtech.com.au
> www.go-overt.com
> and other projects
>
> earn.com/willtech
> linkedin.com/in/damianwilliamson
>
>
> m. 0487135719
> f. +61261470192
>
>
> This email does not constitute a general advice. Please disregard this em=
ail if misdelivered.
> ________________________________
> From: bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev-bounces@lists.linuxfoundation.org> on beha=
lf of Lonero Foundation via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.=
org>
> Sent: Saturday, 6 March 2021 3:16 AM
> To: Devrandom <c1.devrandom@niftybox.net>
> Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Proposal: Consensus (hard fork) PoST Datas=
tore for Energy Efficient Mining
>
> Also in regards to my other email, I forgot to iterate that my cryptograp=
hy proposal helps behind the efficiency category but also tackles problems =
such as NP-Completeness or Halting which is something the BTC network could=
 be vulnerable to in the future. For sake of simplicity, I do want to do th=
is BIP because it tackles lots of the issues in regards to this manner and =
can provide useful insight to the community. If things such as bigger block=
 height have been proposed as hard forks, I feel at the very least an upgra=
de regarding the hashing algorithm and cryptography does at least warrant s=
ome discussion. Anyways I hope I can send you my BIP, just let me know on t=
he preferred format?
>
> Best regards, Andrew
>
> On Fri, Mar 5, 2021, 10:12 AM Lonero Foundation <loneroassociation@gmail.=
com> wrote:
>
> Hi, this isn't about the energy efficient argument in regards to renewabl=
es or mining devices but a better cryptography layer to get the most out of=
 your hashing for validation. I do understand the arbitrariness of it, but =
do want to still propose a document. Do I use the Media Wiki format on GitH=
ub and just attach it as my proposal?
>
> Best regards, Andrew
>
> On Fri, Mar 5, 2021, 10:07 AM Devrandom <c1.devrandom@niftybox.net> wrote=
:
>
> Hi Ryan and Andrew,
>
> On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 5:42 AM Ryan Grant via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@li=
sts.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>
>   https://www.truthcoin.info/blog/pow-cheapest/
>     "Nothing is Cheaper than Proof of Work"
>     on | 04 Aug 2015
>
>
> Just to belabor this a bit, the paper demonstrates that the mining market=
 will tend to expend resources equivalent to miner reward.  It does not pro=
ve that mining work has to expend *energy* as a primary cost.
>
> Some might argue that energy expenditure has negative externalities and t=
hat we should move to other resources.  I would argue that the negative ext=
ernalities will go away soon because of the move to renewables, so the poin=
t is likely moot.
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev