pull down to refresh

This is a very long article, so not everyone will have the time to read it. It was written in 2013, but I just discovered it. There is so much here that I intend to reread it a few times to really appreciate it.
I never heard of Denis Roio, aka Jaromil. I'm sure bitcoiners from back in the day will know of him.
As the introduction states, this ambitious article "investigates historical and philosophical aspects related to the emergence of this [bitcoin]technology."
The article is comprehensive, going back to pre-bitcoin cryptographic advances referred to in this post.

Mining and Proof Of Work

I have to admit that the whole proof of work idea baffled me when I first learned about bitcoin, and there were times when I thought that a bunch of computers trying to solve a math problem was a little ridiculous. Jaromil quotes a 2011 blog post by Mira Luna as the best criticism of bitcoin at the time:
In the end, the artificial creation of the limited number of possible BitCoins via this "proof of work" (doing millions of SHA-256 hashes over and over) is madness. All you really need is to have "proof of limitation" without the politics—was the market restrained from creating too much money too fast? BitCoin’s use of a procedural solution is the wrong track when all you need do is define a constraint via a formula and apply it as needed over time, instead of everyone continuously spinning a hash function and wasting electricity. Keep the transactions public, cryptographically sign them, and audit them with a money model and you’ll be able to keep much of what is good about BitCoin. And of course, use a "commodity" the people can intuitively understand, something like... time.
His response to this criticism struck me as the best explanation of bitcoin mining and proof of work I ever read:
The computation of mining and hence the electricity, is to strenghten the authentication of Bitcoin. Now let us consider the energy that was required, before the existence of Bitcoin, to authenticate the minting process of currency made in paper and less noble metals. It consists of a secret minting procedure, big machinery, a monumental building with thick walls and armed guards on its perimeter: an unstable kind of energy, very difficult to govern, as it relates to a monopoly on violence imposed by the sovereign state. This very energy is substituted by Bitcoin with a qualitatively different approach: Bitcoin distributes peers to the task of building trust in its authenticity. The networked computation of all miners serves as a mint and dissolves the need for violence into an unlimited, unreachable and decentralized power. Clustering the mint gathers the energy necessary to establish and protect the authenticity of the currency. In other words: participation has substituted violence in the physical implementation of currency authentication: a recognizable pattern when we observe historical manifestations of the digital plane of immanence.
I could go on and on. His discussion of early bitcoin symbols and his explanation of networked computing stand out for me also.
I admit I really posted this because while I was reading it I wondered if @elvismercury had ever read it. I like his take on things, and I want to absorb what I read better. I know this is putting him on the spot by forcing him to read it if he hasn't already, but I decided to do it anyway.
was the market restrained from creating too much money too fast? BitCoin’s use of a procedural solution is the wrong track when all you need do is define a constraint via a formula and apply it as needed over time, instead of everyone continuously spinning a hash function and wasting electricity. Keep the transactions public, cryptographically sign them, and audit them with a money model and you’ll be able to keep much of what is good about BitCoin. And of course, use a "commodity" the people can intuitively understand, something like... time.
That's what it does ;_;
Its just so....this isn't the first time I've had to explain that proof of work keeps track of time and to keep track of time without a proof of work mechanism is asking for abuse. You can't know how much internet latency was involved before you received a transaction from your peers (which is why first seen policy in the mempool is silly in practice), but if you adjust the proof of work needed to keep on track for 10 minutes per block and you know it will take exponentially more computing power with every passing block to rebuild a valid chain, then you have a reliable way to keep track of time with no way for timestamps to be faked (in a meaningful way)
reply
It makes sense to have so-called commodity hardware/software to do prof-of-work. The latest ASIC is hardly a commodity piece, one can't buy it at the local hardware store. Easy access to that hardware/software would make more people participate and secure the network. Ain't that the whole idea?
reply
Yeah so a new mining pool called "Ocean" booted up recently promoting itself on the idea of providing support for ASIC space heater users (which includes ASIC water tank heaters, green house heaters etc etc etc). While I don't think ASICs will ever be in Best Buy for example (if only because online retail is killling brick and mortor stores) you can actually buy ASICs off of newegg
reply
Like monero CPU mining? I doubt that's possible. Other ideas?
reply
Yeah, that is one good example. Whatever happened to that? Is that still a thing? :-) Just imagine, the south side of your mountain property (with a waterfall) dedicated to producing solar and hydro energy to secure the network(s) ... that's a dream worth having. IMHO....
reply
If monero were as used and valued as Bitcoin, we would see multiple CPU motherboards gain popularity. 16 Ryzen architecture CPU slots per board would be everywhere and people would complain that they can't buy CPUs because of "the crypto miners"
reply
Exactly. Maybe the answer is the new, cheaper commodity like heater miners, combined with Ocean style pools, if the goal is to combat centralization of mining power. I'm not sure how practical that is, though.
reply
I know this is putting him on the spot by forcing him to read it if he hasn't already, but I decided to do it anyway.
Haha, it is a privilege to accept this commission from a gentleman of your calibre.
It will take a bit, though, as I'm on a big work trip. Stay tuned.
reply
No rush at all. I appreciate your impressions whenever you have the time.
reply