3 ms·
Can't argue against you there, but isn't the point of Proof of Work that it grows as our ignorance (inverse of hashing power) diminishes?; The smarter we get, t
by andirk 9y ago
Can't argue against you there, but isn't the point of Proof of Work that it grows as our ignorance (inverse of hashing power) diminishes?; The smarter we get, the more difficult it gets.
- justifier 9y agosure, but at some point you run out of leading zeros or as bitcoin attempts to obfuscate it: "target=0" it has yet to be proved, in the positive or negative, whether an algo can compute any target of a 256 bit hash in polynomial time forcing difficulty to require, at least, larger hashes or specific hardware the problem with larger hashes is what makes the PoW difficulty where you need it also would cause the 'difficulty' of storage and reading of that hash to increase impractically the problem with specific hardware is purely speculative but i would assume issues of frauds claiming to mine on the impeded hardware but truly use fully functioning hardware, or force the network to be centrally mined to ensure the hardware used which breaks cryptocurrency's image as decentralised from https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Difficulty#What_is_the_maximum_difficulty.3F https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Difficulty#What_is_the_maximum_di... "The actual maximum difficulty is when current_target=0, but we would not be able to calculate the difficulty if that happened. (fortunately it never will, so we're ok.)" that 'never' is simply offensive to the foundation of mathematical rigor that bitcoin is built on, and i would argue an attempt to defraud potential, and current, users