š
Original date posted:2021-05-18
š Original message:Good morning devrandom,
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 11:47 PM ZmnSCPxj:
>
> > When considering any new proof-of-foo, it is best to consider all effects until you reach the base physics of the arrow of time, at which point you will realize it is ultimately just another proof-of-work anyway.
>
> Let's not simplify away economic considerations, such as externalities.Ā The whole debate about the current PoW is about negative externalities related to energy production.
>
> Depending on the details, CAPEX (R&D, real-estate, construction, production) may have less externalities, and if that's the case, we should be interested in adopting a PoW that is intensive in these types of CAPEX.
Then let us also not forget another important externality: possible optimizations of a new PoW algorithm that risk being put into some kind of exclusive patent.
I think with high probability that SHA256d as used by Bitcoin will no longer have an optimization as large in effect as ASICBOOST in the future, simply because there is a huge incentive to find such optimizations and Bitcoin has been using SHA256d for 12 years already, and we have already found ASICBOOST (and while patented, as I understand it the patent owner has promised not to enforce the patent --- my understanding may be wrong).
Any alternative PoW algorithm risks an ASICBOOST-like optimization that is currently unknown, but which will be discovered (and possibly patented by an owner that *will* enforce the patent, thus putting the entire ecosystem at direct conflict with legacy government structures) once there is a good incentive (i.e. use in Bitcoin) for it.
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
ZmnSCPxj [ARCHIVE] /
npub1g5ā¦3ms3l
2023-06-07 22:53:41
in reply to nevent1qā¦h5l9
Author Public Key
npub1g5zswf6y48f7fy90jf3tlcuwdmjn8znhzaa4vkmtxaeskca8hpss23ms3lPublished at
2023-06-07 22:53:41Event JSON
{
"id": "f5a6d0a69e288551532a09ed32070c8dd97ff770dce9290507d80d315162cf1f",
"pubkey": "4505072744a9d3e490af9262bfe38e6ee5338a77177b565b6b37730b63a7b861",
"created_at": 1686178421,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"23cc8bb58df38c812629bafb90c02050d06847f0b1c392ffa4a06f11eafdb6f4",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"22b4a86e3767c83aa304b5351202725141b4c8ba8a4f6d5e0e4932394525dac7",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"93e50f297b9985b1adba93e5476189e5e00720066bac1db9471ef7c229448b85"
]
],
"content": "š
Original date posted:2021-05-18\nš Original message:Good morning devrandom,\n\n\u003e On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 11:47 PM ZmnSCPxj:\n\u003e\n\u003e \u003e When considering any new proof-of-foo, it is best to consider all effects until you reach the base physics of the arrow of time, at which point you will realize it is ultimately just another proof-of-work anyway.\n\u003e\n\u003e Let's not simplify away economic considerations, such as externalities.Ā The whole debate about the current PoW is about negative externalities related to energy production.\n\u003e\n\u003e Depending on the details, CAPEX (R\u0026D, real-estate, construction, production) may have less externalities, and if that's the case, we should be interested in adopting a PoW that is intensive in these types of CAPEX.\n\nThen let us also not forget another important externality: possible optimizations of a new PoW algorithm that risk being put into some kind of exclusive patent.\n\nI think with high probability that SHA256d as used by Bitcoin will no longer have an optimization as large in effect as ASICBOOST in the future, simply because there is a huge incentive to find such optimizations and Bitcoin has been using SHA256d for 12 years already, and we have already found ASICBOOST (and while patented, as I understand it the patent owner has promised not to enforce the patent --- my understanding may be wrong).\n\nAny alternative PoW algorithm risks an ASICBOOST-like optimization that is currently unknown, but which will be discovered (and possibly patented by an owner that *will* enforce the patent, thus putting the entire ecosystem at direct conflict with legacy government structures) once there is a good incentive (i.e. use in Bitcoin) for it.\n\nRegards,\nZmnSCPxj",
"sig": "f8d798e0fbbb1ed713087bd04459115707af9d1702ecfcee5c52c182a5640d4d6a918b55c0133e86ac1adb7f3a5c318867b6e992615b83cc2cadc04fc7662e52"
}