5 ms·

This is essentially how bitcoin's proof of work algorithm works. They maintain the difficulty by adding 0s as computers get faster.

cyanydeez 2y ago
Isn't the reason more about limiting currency. Most of the crypto bros all hate the money printers. The fact that faster hashers will come about just adds some natural competition, but it's still about limiting money supplies.
- quirino 2y ago
  The hashing is about consensus. It's related how a low hash stands as proof of computational power, you can't just fake it. The "adding more zeros" is done automatically, according to an algorithm, so that the time between blocks is more or less the same. There's this incredible MIT course about all of this, it's where I got the idea for the site from: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUl4u3cNGP61KHzhg3JIJdK08JLSlcLId https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUl4u3cNGP61KHzhg3JIJdK08...
  - noman-land 2y ago
    Thanks for the playlist! I've already been going through the later videos.
- bawolff 2y ago
  Its about preventing double spending of the same bitcoin.
- olalonde 2y ago
  That's incorrect. The money supply is fixed irrespective of the hash rate.
  - brokenmachine 2y ago
    But it halves every so often.
    - olalonde 2y ago
      Yes, the block reward halves every 210K block or roughly every ~4 years, but that's independent of the hash rate. Bitcoin adapts to the hash rate so that blocks are produced approximately every 10 minutes. Eventually the total supply of 21M BTC will be reached after which new bitcoin issuance will cease.
      - brokenmachine 2y ago
        But "it's still about limiting money supplies" is correct, no? One's investment in mining equipment becomes half as profitable every so often.
        olalonde 2y ago
        No, mining profitability and money supply are distinct concepts. In fact, mining profitability constantly fluctuates depending on many factors aside from the block reward (e.g. electricity cost, total hash rate, equipment depreciation, BTC price, etc.). Bitcoin could have been designed with a different money supply mechanism (e.g. no halvings) but it would still have required mining. The hash rate has basically no impact on the money supply. That's because mining doesn't solve the problem of limiting the money supply, it solves the problem of decentralized consensus, aka the double spending problem.
        brokenmachine 2y ago
        I understand the purpose of mining and how the hash rate adjusts but I'm trying to understand about the profitability. Imagine you are a miner and a halving is next week. One week you earn 1btc. None of those other factors you mentioned have changed. Then the halving happens so the next week you make 0.5btc. However yours and everyone else's held bitcoins are still worth the same as they were before. Hasn't your mining profitability halved?
moffkalast 2y ago
Yep. So much compute and energy thrown away because proof of stake wasn't figured out sooner.
- mindcandy 2y ago
  You need some proof of work to prime the pump for proof of stake. Otherwise, you have no security because there's nothing at stake. Now that we have plenty of proof of work completed, we don't really need any more. You can bootstrap your new coin by burning Bitcoins as a provable value sink to get it started on the path to POS.
  - moffkalast 2y ago
    You could stake fiat in a bank account I guess?
    - mindcandy 2y ago
      That's pretty much Tether. You could probably bootstrap a POS coin by staking Tether. There would be a lot of details in getting it to eventually grow independent of Tether. I don't claim to know how that could happen. Especially since Tether is not a highly-regarded/trusted token in the community.
      - jhobag 2y ago
        lol what this nonsense. tether's regarded as the safest bc their biz model is providing entities usdt for usd without offering interest on the cash. now why would any entities want to deposit usd into a private bank and receive usdt without any yield on their cash? you think you understand tether so well maybe think about it for a few minutes
  - stavros 2y ago
    Did Ethereum end up moving to PoS? How did that work out?

cyanydeez 2y ago

Isn't the reason more about limiting currency. Most of the crypto bros all hate the money printers. The fact that faster hashers will come about just adds some natural competition, but it's still about limiting money supplies.

quirino 2y ago
The hashing is about consensus. It's related how a low hash stands as proof of computational power, you can't just fake it. The "adding more zeros" is done automatically, according to an algorithm, so that the time between blocks is more or less the same. There's this incredible MIT course about all of this, it's where I got the idea for the site from: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUl4u3cNGP61KHzhg3JIJdK08JLSlcLId https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUl4u3cNGP61KHzhg3JIJdK08...
- noman-land 2y ago
  Thanks for the playlist! I've already been going through the later videos.
bawolff 2y ago
Its about preventing double spending of the same bitcoin.
olalonde 2y ago
That's incorrect. The money supply is fixed irrespective of the hash rate.
- brokenmachine 2y ago
  But it halves every so often.
  - olalonde 2y ago
    Yes, the block reward halves every 210K block or roughly every ~4 years, but that's independent of the hash rate. Bitcoin adapts to the hash rate so that blocks are produced approximately every 10 minutes. Eventually the total supply of 21M BTC will be reached after which new bitcoin issuance will cease.
    - brokenmachine 2y ago
      But "it's still about limiting money supplies" is correct, no? One's investment in mining equipment becomes half as profitable every so often.
      - olalonde 2y ago
        No, mining profitability and money supply are distinct concepts. In fact, mining profitability constantly fluctuates depending on many factors aside from the block reward (e.g. electricity cost, total hash rate, equipment depreciation, BTC price, etc.). Bitcoin could have been designed with a different money supply mechanism (e.g. no halvings) but it would still have required mining. The hash rate has basically no impact on the money supply. That's because mining doesn't solve the problem of limiting the money supply, it solves the problem of decentralized consensus, aka the double spending problem.
        brokenmachine 2y ago
        I understand the purpose of mining and how the hash rate adjusts but I'm trying to understand about the profitability. Imagine you are a miner and a halving is next week. One week you earn 1btc. None of those other factors you mentioned have changed. Then the halving happens so the next week you make 0.5btc. However yours and everyone else's held bitcoins are still worth the same as they were before. Hasn't your mining profitability halved?

moffkalast 2y ago

Yep. So much compute and energy thrown away because proof of stake wasn't figured out sooner.

mindcandy 2y ago
You need some proof of work to prime the pump for proof of stake. Otherwise, you have no security because there's nothing at stake. Now that we have plenty of proof of work completed, we don't really need any more. You can bootstrap your new coin by burning Bitcoins as a provable value sink to get it started on the path to POS.
- moffkalast 2y ago
  You could stake fiat in a bank account I guess?
  - mindcandy 2y ago
    That's pretty much Tether. You could probably bootstrap a POS coin by staking Tether. There would be a lot of details in getting it to eventually grow independent of Tether. I don't claim to know how that could happen. Especially since Tether is not a highly-regarded/trusted token in the community.
    - jhobag 2y ago
      lol what this nonsense. tether's regarded as the safest bc their biz model is providing entities usdt for usd without offering interest on the cash. now why would any entities want to deposit usd into a private bank and receive usdt without any yield on their cash? you think you understand tether so well maybe think about it for a few minutes
- stavros 2y ago
  Did Ethereum end up moving to PoS? How did that work out?