Erik Aronesty [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: š
Original date posted:2021-05-18 š Original message:1. i never suggested vdf's ...
š
Original date posted:2021-05-18
š Original message:1. i never suggested vdf's to replace pow.
2. my suggestion was specifically *in the context of* a working
proof-of-burn protocol
- vdfs used only for timing (not block height)
- blind-burned coins of a specific age used to replace proof of work
- the required "work" per block would simply be a competition to
acquire rewards, and so miners would have to burn coins, well in
advance, and hope that their burned coins got rewarded in some far
future
- the point of burned coins is to mimic, in every meaningful way, the
value gained from proof of work... without some of the security
drawbacks
- the miner risks losing all of his burned coins (like all miners risk
losing their work in each block)
- new burns can't be used
- old burns age out (like ASICs do)
- other requirements on burns might be needed to properly mirror the
properties of PoW and the incentives Bitcoin uses to mine honestly.
3. i do believe it is *possible* that a "burned coin + vdf system"
might be more secure in the long run, and that if the entire space
agreed that such an endeavor was worthwhile, a test net could be spun
up, and a hard-fork could be initiated.
4. i would never suggest such a thing unless i believed it was
possible that consensus was possible. so no, this is not an "alt
coin"
On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 10:02 AM Zac Greenwood <zachgrw at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi ZmnSCPxj,
>
> Please note that I am not suggesting VDFs as a means to save energy, but solely as a means to make the time between blocks more constant.
>
> Zac
>
>
> On Tue, 18 May 2021 at 12:42, ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj at protonmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Good morning Zac,
>>
>> > VDFs might enable more constant block times, for instance by having a two-step PoW:
>> >
>> > 1. Use a VDF that takes say 9 minutes to resolve (VDF being subject to difficulty adjustments similar to the as-is). As per the property of VDFs, miners are able show proof of work.
>> >
>> > 2. Use current PoW mechanism with lower difficulty so finding a block takes 1 minute on average, again subject to as-is difficulty adjustments.
>> >
>> > As a result, variation in block times will be greatly reduced.
>>
>> As I understand it, another weakness of VDFs is that they are not inherently progress-free (their sequential nature prevents that; they are inherently progress-requiring).
>>
>> Thus, a miner which focuses on improving the amount of energy that it can pump into the VDF circuitry (by overclocking and freezing the circuitry), could potentially get into a winner-takes-all situation, possibly leading to even *worse* competition and even *more* energy consumption.
>> After all, if you can start mining 0.1s faster than the competition, that is a 0.1s advantage where *only you* can mine *in the entire world*.
>>
>> Regards,
>> ZmnSCPxj
Published at
2023-06-07 22:52:46Event JSON
{
"id": "c8a9ff67083ea47b5da3d8c866e196a9e51dd66e63914e2893b1bc987fb9e2f4",
"pubkey": "22944ce1e29904e3826d25013a614e4665693ec514003efacc1b7586e8e5d0aa",
"created_at": 1686178366,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"3924236b4a6804e5062f43250316165d7329dbe370a76aa07c1a86d1bcab9697",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"5b9b9bcdce63caa2b4b377d10ffb17509a4cd7f8614ae75216cb3dc518fe7586",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"4137bb41a55a1c2c51d18f37f33cf0c29082422c56398d859ff1085f29eebd4b"
]
],
"content": "š
Original date posted:2021-05-18\nš Original message:1. i never suggested vdf's to replace pow.\n\n2. my suggestion was specifically *in the context of* a working\nproof-of-burn protocol\n\n- vdfs used only for timing (not block height)\n- blind-burned coins of a specific age used to replace proof of work\n- the required \"work\" per block would simply be a competition to\nacquire rewards, and so miners would have to burn coins, well in\nadvance, and hope that their burned coins got rewarded in some far\nfuture\n- the point of burned coins is to mimic, in every meaningful way, the\nvalue gained from proof of work... without some of the security\ndrawbacks\n- the miner risks losing all of his burned coins (like all miners risk\nlosing their work in each block)\n- new burns can't be used\n- old burns age out (like ASICs do)\n- other requirements on burns might be needed to properly mirror the\nproperties of PoW and the incentives Bitcoin uses to mine honestly.\n\n3. i do believe it is *possible* that a \"burned coin + vdf system\"\nmight be more secure in the long run, and that if the entire space\nagreed that such an endeavor was worthwhile, a test net could be spun\nup, and a hard-fork could be initiated.\n\n4. i would never suggest such a thing unless i believed it was\npossible that consensus was possible. so no, this is not an \"alt\ncoin\"\n\nOn Tue, May 18, 2021 at 10:02 AM Zac Greenwood \u003czachgrw at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e Hi ZmnSCPxj,\n\u003e\n\u003e Please note that I am not suggesting VDFs as a means to save energy, but solely as a means to make the time between blocks more constant.\n\u003e\n\u003e Zac\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e On Tue, 18 May 2021 at 12:42, ZmnSCPxj \u003cZmnSCPxj at protonmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Good morning Zac,\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e \u003e VDFs might enable more constant block times, for instance by having a two-step PoW:\n\u003e\u003e \u003e\n\u003e\u003e \u003e 1. Use a VDF that takes say 9 minutes to resolve (VDF being subject to difficulty adjustments similar to the as-is). As per the property of VDFs, miners are able show proof of work.\n\u003e\u003e \u003e\n\u003e\u003e \u003e 2. Use current PoW mechanism with lower difficulty so finding a block takes 1 minute on average, again subject to as-is difficulty adjustments.\n\u003e\u003e \u003e\n\u003e\u003e \u003e As a result, variation in block times will be greatly reduced.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e As I understand it, another weakness of VDFs is that they are not inherently progress-free (their sequential nature prevents that; they are inherently progress-requiring).\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Thus, a miner which focuses on improving the amount of energy that it can pump into the VDF circuitry (by overclocking and freezing the circuitry), could potentially get into a winner-takes-all situation, possibly leading to even *worse* competition and even *more* energy consumption.\n\u003e\u003e After all, if you can start mining 0.1s faster than the competition, that is a 0.1s advantage where *only you* can mine *in the entire world*.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Regards,\n\u003e\u003e ZmnSCPxj",
"sig": "466d7f65c14fe09bd90b8a4c93fdb4b8cd85dca6c8e92e875c224c167de72d62513e53c177b37de3e6db926b54e4b22cfbf33138373e5735cc6ddd638193e457"
}