1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gmaxwell@gmail.com>) id 1VBWg6-00006Y-MA
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 19 Aug 2013 21:07:54 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.217.174 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.217.174; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
helo=mail-lb0-f174.google.com;
Received: from mail-lb0-f174.google.com ([209.85.217.174])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1VBWg4-0008BD-T8
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 19 Aug 2013 21:07:54 +0000
Received: by mail-lb0-f174.google.com with SMTP id w20so3379695lbh.19
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Mon, 19 Aug 2013 14:07:46 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.20.36 with SMTP id k4mr3357950lae.33.1376946466159; Mon,
19 Aug 2013 14:07:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.112.89.72 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Aug 2013 14:07:46 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <FFE335820B1BFF4F8E8619F446F2D87F4C1A2E7B@MSGPEXCEI26B.mfad.mfroot.org>
References: <FFE335820B1BFF4F8E8619F446F2D87F4C1A2E7B@MSGPEXCEI26B.mfad.mfroot.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 14:07:46 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgQtGg+SxRc7Byw0_L3NpEudPTtBpmnKYt-+7VEVSnKZaQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: "Goss, Brian C., M.D." <Goss.Brian@mayo.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(gmaxwell[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
0.0 LOTS_OF_MONEY Huge... sums of money
X-Headers-End: 1VBWg4-0008BD-T8
Cc: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net"
<bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: remove "getwork" RPC from
bitcoind
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 21:07:54 -0000
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Goss, Brian C., M.D.
<Goss.Brian@mayo.edu> wrote:
> What if we have a massive (like many orders of magnitude) drop in network=
harsh rate? Might such a function be useful to salvage the (non-functioni=
ng) network? Same for IRC bootstrapping. How do we pick ourselves up off t=
he ground in case of the equivalent of a great depression in network hash r=
ate (or some jerk spending $100M just to drive the difficulty up and then t=
urning his hardware off?).
[Aside: When replying to the digest, please try to trim it]
It appears that we will soon be at a hashrate where all the desktop
CPUs in the world couldn't really make a dent in it... certainly not
desktop cpus using the slow integrated cpu miner, which is much slower
than external optimized cpu miners.
But this is why I suggest packaging up a modern mining tool that
supports CPU/GPU/FPGA/ASIC mining against a current bitcoind. Doing so
would reduce the difference between testnet and mainnet, and provide
an actually useful tool for contributing directly.
Though again, I note, that Jeff's patch doesn't actually remove the
integrated miner (I think it should=E2=80=A6). Just the getwork support fo=
r
external miners which don't use getblocktemplate... and if you're
going to download one of those you could go download bfgminer instead.
|
