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
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
|
Return-Path: <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::137])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B04C3C000A
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 17 Mar 2021 06:56:42 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EC9F4ED9C
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 17 Mar 2021 06:56:42 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7,
RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001,
SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id VGMvJLHhX-Pz
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 17 Mar 2021 06:56:40 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from mail-40132.protonmail.ch (mail-40132.protonmail.ch
[185.70.40.132])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB70C4ED89
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 17 Mar 2021 06:56:40 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 06:56:27 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
s=protonmail; t=1615964197;
bh=NEZkY/5MKA6z7gJLV9HT5FMBBXYCSfcc0oiaSV14Q/4=;
h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From;
b=qJmuxTVv3apYQyBmILX+nP0zdQijT0fkfWpyauHImdFzts6jP7CpsWXeyEW2Dsccy
y4VnBAU9AfoWqHi8HXkN7eqyIMZkrHAo4Nw3e+RF5E7bibEAmBUONnsywhpQKLgHm6
Fr857WaIzdSQgs/B89SQ5noVPx52SyXgXpMSdpVo=
To: Lonero Foundation <loneroassociation@gmail.com>
From: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <3eY-dfJ9c5qbmAL2gnRAkTFw_HYki0sNAwTtGptRleabpGhy7r5BApXD7qQs8OA63zAGrLha2ZIfGCbqyn1zHIbCaUgZv6Qmoqkz7M6mKV4=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+YkXXzv2Q02uwAvdwOPjk=Lkj5jyYb6AtC5B25oGfVej0y6TA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+YkXXxUdZFYTa1c-F=-FzoQQVtV3GUmE2Okec-zRAD3xS1qAQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CALeFGL3E-rWW9aJkwre_3UF44vbNxPH2436DvaQdHoqEQ5b+eg@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+YkXXyBmOootb=Kt6CH3yquYVnAZd=fJQqiF_A3p_pkB8QC3g@mail.gmail.com>
<CALC81CMDQf4PqxRisQw58OL7QSFeMcQTvLMvmtOGJ_ya4-dhLg@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+YkXXyP=BQ_a42J=RE7HJFcJ73atyrt4KWKUG8LbsbW=u4b5w@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+YkXXw1AiMqCoPk_pUOdDMfkGF_T+aURGAjGK=MTa7jtAQchg@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+YkXXy1Y407UDdEjRVjzBFOCmaUKDoZkvqtXkxkmXmMdNrwBQ@mail.gmail.com>
<rJRQhaMpP-Rq5oJ8nscd81M3tq8PiaSGfvlF6xr0qIjJgcoN_p3azQ9-a-RAvIxDmRa1cfoBkJZnLXILDzhYKh3SDk9TE08wbX60d6EAjQw=@protonmail.com>
<CA+YkXXzv2Q02uwAvdwOPjk=Lkj5jyYb6AtC5B25oGfVej0y6TA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Proposal: Consensus (hard fork) PoST
Datastore for Energy Efficient Mining
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol 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: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 06:56:42 -0000
Good morning Andrew,
> I wouldn't fully discount general purpose hardware or hardware outside of=
the realm of ASICS. BOINC (https://cds.cern.ch/record/800111/files/p1099.p=
df) implements a decent distributed computing protocol (granted it isn't a =
cryptocurrency), but it far computes data at a much cheaper cost compared t=
o the competition w/ decent levels of fault tolerance. I myself am running =
an extremely large scale open distributed computing pipeline, and can tell =
you for certain that what is out there is insane. In regards to the argumen=
t of generic HDDs and CPUs, the algorithmic implementation I am providing w=
ould likely make them more adaptable. More than likely, evidently there wou=
ld be specialized HDDs similar to BurstCoin Miners, and 128-core CPUs, and =
all that. This could be inevitable, but the main point is providing access =
to other forms of computation along w/ ASICs. At the very least, the generi=
c guys can experience it, and other infrastructures can have some form of c=
ompatibility.
What would the advantage of this be?
As I see it, changing the underlying algorithm is simply an attempt to reve=
rse history, by requiring a new strain of specialization to be started inst=
ead of continuing the trend of optimizing SHA256d very very well.
I think it may be better to push *through* rather than *back*, and instead =
spread the optimization of SHA256d-specific hardware so widely that anyone =
with 2 BTC liquidity in one location has no particular advantage over anyon=
e with 2 BTC liquidity in another location.
For one, I expect that there will be fewer patentable surprises remaining w=
ith SHA256d than any newer, much more complicated construction.
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
|
