BitShares PTS (formerly ProtoShares) Mandatory Upgrade & Snapshot Announcement - page 53.

AnonyMint

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 521

Quote from: Luckybit on November 07, 2013, 03:23:23 AM

Quote from: AnonyMint on November 07, 2013, 02:16:06 AM

Quote from: Luckybit on November 07, 2013, 02:07:24 AM

Quote from: AnonyMint on November 07, 2013, 01:28:20 AM

I can't work with bytemaster because he and I don't agree. He wants to make a socialist coin where everyone receives their fair share just by sitting on their coins, and I would want to make a capitalist coin which doesn't steal (ahem redistribute) value to give to the collective of coin owners. The coin owners are already profiting from the rise in value of the coin.

I do talk with others behind the scenes.

Are you saying he doesn't believe in the survival of the fittest?
He doesn't believe in the market?

That doesn't seem to be what his documents say on his websites. What gives you the idea that its a socialist coin? I never heard of that before.

The public discussions he and I had (in his bitcointalk threads) about how everyone gets what is akin to an interest payment, and how everyone who owns the domain name coin gets a payment. He claims to be Austrian economics based, yet apparently he and I disagree about what that entails. I'd rather not rehash that here. The prior discussions are available. My summary is inaccurate I am sure. Better to go read the prior discussions.

I never knew that. Maybe these coins have inherent value afterall.
How is it socialism though if we had to mine it (work for it) or buy it?

Since when was interest socialism?

I will not rehash that discussion here. I don't want to get off on an economics debate here.

Luckybit

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 510

Quote from: AnonyMint on November 07, 2013, 02:16:06 AM

Quote from: Luckybit on November 07, 2013, 02:07:24 AM

Quote from: AnonyMint on November 07, 2013, 01:28:20 AM

I can't work with bytemaster because he and I don't agree. He wants to make a socialist coin where everyone receives their fair share just by sitting on their coins, and I would want to make a capitalist coin which doesn't steal (ahem redistribute) value to give to the collective of coin owners. The coin owners are already profiting from the rise in value of the coin.

I do talk with others behind the scenes.

Are you saying he doesn't believe in the survival of the fittest?
He doesn't believe in the market?

That doesn't seem to be what his documents say on his websites. What gives you the idea that its a socialist coin? I never heard of that before.

The public discussions he and I had (in his bitcointalk threads) about how everyone gets what is akin to an interest payment, and how everyone who owns the domain name coin gets a payment. He claims to be Austrian economics based, yet apparently he and I disagree about what that entails. I'd rather not rehash that here. The prior discussions are available. My summary is inaccurate I am sure. Better to go read the prior discussions.

I never knew that. Maybe these coins have inherent value afterall.
How is it socialism though if we had to mine it (work for it) or buy it?

Since when was interest socialism?

The only problem with interest is where does that money come from? I wouldn't say it's socialism because it's more like property owners charging rent, but I suppose you could see it as a sort of tax but isn't that the same as what Bitcoin miners do with transaction fees?

AnonyMint

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 521

Quote from: Etlase2 on November 07, 2013, 03:21:19 AM

Quote from: AnonyMint on November 07, 2013, 03:12:17 AM

The point of CPU-only is the millions mass your coin can gain in the market since anyone can download and get some coin. Mass leads to network effects, which leads to competing against Bitcoin effectively, given Bitcoin only has 350,000 users.

This is not a well-thought argument. A CPU coin is likely to be dominated by expensive CPUs and/or CPU farms that are available for time purchase. Those with low-end CPUs will be forced to upgrade to remain relevant, but the simpler and perhaps more financially sound option is to purchase the currency in lieu of mining it. This is the *exact same* scenario with GPUs. And it also makes sense economically because if everyone is a miner, no one is demanding to trade fiat for it, and all value must enter the coin via burning electricity.

I guess you haven't read this:

Quote from: AnonyMint on November 06, 2013, 12:02:47 AM

1. With CPU-only mining, I expect difficulty to exceed any reasonable
level that can be returned on investment, because millions of people will
do it because they easily can (download and click) and they won't correlate
to their insignificant increase in electric bill nor the cost of the PC they
already own applied to their part-time, hobbyist mining.

Meaning there won't be sufficient return for serious miners after the initial launch period. Only the masses will bother once the masses are the majority of miners. Wink

That was my most clever insight.

Call this the "lottery effect". People play the lottery even though it is a horrible return-on-investment.

AnonyMint

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 521

Quote from: digitalindustry on November 07, 2013, 03:20:27 AM

Quote from: Etlase2 on November 07, 2013, 02:04:58 AM

The bounty isn't for whether or not GPUs can mine it, the bounty is for whether or not there is a non-linear speed increase available without the memory tradeoff. If GPUs end up being faster, big deal, it isn't going to be an order of magnitude faster unless you have an order of magnitude increase in the memory bandwidth or in the memory available. At least, that is the presumption by my understanding.

^
That

Except that is a wrong assumption if I am correct in my understanding.

Etlase2

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

Quote from: AnonyMint on November 07, 2013, 03:12:17 AM

The point of CPU-only is the millions mass your coin can gain in the market since anyone can download and get some coin. Mass leads to network effects, which leads to competing against Bitcoin effectively, given Bitcoin only has 350,000 users.

This is not a well-thought argument. A CPU coin is likely to be dominated by expensive CPUs and/or CPU farms that are available for time purchase. Those with low-end CPUs will be forced to upgrade to remain relevant, but the simpler and perhaps more financially sound option is to purchase the currency in lieu of mining it. This is the *exact same* scenario with GPUs. And it also makes sense economically because if everyone is a miner, no one is demanding to trade fiat for it, and all value must enter the coin via burning electricity.

digitalindustry

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

‘Try to be nice’

Quote from: Etlase2 on November 07, 2013, 02:04:58 AM

The bounty isn't for whether or not GPUs can mine it, the bounty is for whether or not there is a non-linear speed increase available without the memory tradeoff. If GPUs end up being faster, big deal, it isn't going to be an order of magnitude faster unless you have an order of magnitude increase in the memory bandwidth or in the memory available. At least, that is the presumption by my understanding.

^
That

AnonyMint

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 521

Quote from: Etlase2 on November 07, 2013, 03:01:32 AM

Quote from: AnonyMint on November 07, 2013, 02:43:09 AM

Any thing that is computationally intensive can be mined faster on the GPU employing 1000s of hardware threads

A GPU is a relatively general purpose device, and with GPGPU on the horizon, is it really a problem? What is the fascination with CPU only? As long as ASICs remain specific and an algorithm is easy to change, ASICs can't have an advantage over GPU/GPGPUs because they can easily become obsolete. With this algo, it is trivial to change the hashing algorithm while keeping the verification simple and general purpose devices relevant.

The point of CPU-only is the millions mass your coin can gain in the market since anyone can download and get some coin. Mass leads to economic network effects, which perhaps leads to competing against Bitcoin effectively, given Bitcoin only has 350,000 users.

I have programmed software all by myself which had a million downloads when the internet 10 times smaller.

Also the mining is in theory not cartelized. This is very important in my opinion. If the mining is controlled by a few entities, you no longer have a decentralized money and the government can then take over.

Changing algorithms is not practical for an established coin, because the existing peers may not accept the hard fork. So ASIC immune design needs to also be considered.

Etlase2

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

Quote from: AnonyMint on November 07, 2013, 02:43:09 AM

Any thing that is computationally intensive can be mined faster on the GPU employing 1000s of hardware threads

A GPU is a relatively general purpose device, and with GPGPU on the horizon, is it really a problem? What is the fascination with CPU only? As long as ASICs remain specific and an algorithm is easy to change, ASICs can't have an advantage over GPU/GPGPUs because they can easily become obsolete. With this algo, it is trivial to change the hashing algorithm while keeping the verification simple and general purpose devices relevant.

FreeTrade

legendary

Activity: 1428

Merit: 1030

Inflammatory, offtopic post about primecoin removed.

AnonyMint

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 521

Quote from: Etlase2 on November 07, 2013, 02:45:14 AM

Quote from: AnonyMint on November 07, 2013, 02:23:40 AM

Note the 768MB is within L3 cache, which has much lower memory latency, so the specific case might not be as bad as a larger memory case.

When did L3 caches become 768MB?

Excuse me I was thinking 768 KB. You are correct, it is outside of L3. I've been rather sleepless lately.

Etlase2

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

Quote from: AnonyMint on November 07, 2013, 02:23:40 AM

Note the 768MB is within L3 cache, which has much lower memory latency, so the specific case might not be as bad as a larger memory case.

When did L3 caches become 768MB?

AnonyMint

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 521

Quote from: Stinky_Pete on November 06, 2013, 09:59:04 PM

Quote from: Luckybit on November 06, 2013, 08:45:39 PM

I believe someone is already GPU mining it and planning to dump thousands of coins.

And your evidence for this is what?

People kept believing that Primecoin was being GPU mined, without any evidence. And still no-one has admitted to being able to mine it on GPUs, the two well publicised efforts both ending in failure.

Any thing that is computationally intensive can be mined faster on the GPU employing 1000s of hardware threads, so I find it impossible to believe that Primecoin is a CPU-only coin.

Sy

legendary

Activity: 1484

Merit: 1003

Bounty Detective

Interesting thing, a 32 core xeon server gets only ~45 hpm (-10 if i increase threads from 32 to 64) and found 1 block so far - where a decent quadcore (sandy and newer) will run at 20-25 hpm - just a little "fun fact" for all your bot and datacenter resistance comments.

Oh and Windows generally performs worse since its 32 bit, 3 threads net me 11 hpm in Windows and around 16-18 in Linux, 4 got me to the mentioned 20-22 hpm with an i5-3570k non oc.

AnonyMint

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 521

Quote from: FreeTrade on November 07, 2013, 02:21:28 AM

Quote from: AnonyMint on November 07, 2013, 01:55:42 AM

The limiting factor on the CPU is not memory bandwidth, rather memory latency which is less than 1 GB per second because the memory latency of main memory (if outside of L3) is several hundred clock cycles. With only 8 hardware hyperthreads, that latency isn't entirely masked away.

Whereas, the GPU can run 1000s of hardware threads (not software threads!) which masks away the latency and hits the memory bandwidth as the limit.

This is why the GPU blows away the CPU.

A hardware thread has its own copy of registers so there is nearly no cost to blocking the thread on memory access, so another thread can run which was blocked and is ready to proceed.

I think an optimized algorithm, either for CPU or GPU is going to need really detailed knowledge of memory latency issues - more knowledge than I have. You might be onto something with this - I don't have enough knowledge in this area to know if or what level of improvement managing memory latency could offer. You'll have to wait for BM's response.

I have that knowledge and have done all the research.

FreeTrade

legendary

Activity: 1428

Merit: 1030

Quote from: AnonyMint on November 07, 2013, 01:55:42 AM

The limiting factor on the CPU is not memory bandwidth, rather memory latency which is less than 1 GB per second because the memory latency of main memory (if outside of L3) is several hundred clock cycles. With only 8 hardware hyperthreads, that latency isn't entirely masked away.

Whereas, the GPU can run 1000s of hardware threads (not software threads!) which masks away the latency and hits the memory bandwidth as the limit.

This is why the GPU blows away the CPU.

A hardware thread has its own copy of registers so there is nearly no cost to blocking the thread on memory access, so another thread can run which was blocked and is ready to proceed.

I think an optimized algorithm, either for CPU or GPU is going to need really detailed knowledge of memory latency issues - more knowledge than I have. You might be onto something with this - I don't have enough knowledge in this area to know if or what level of improvement managing memory latency could offer. You'll have to wait for BM's response.

AnonyMint

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 521

Quote from: Luckybit on November 07, 2013, 02:07:24 AM

Quote from: AnonyMint on November 07, 2013, 01:28:20 AM

I can't work with bytemaster because he and I don't agree. He wants to make a socialist coin where everyone receives their fair share just by sitting on their coins, and I would want to make a capitalist coin which doesn't steal (ahem redistribute) value to give to the collective of coin owners. The coin owners are already profiting from the rise in value of the coin.

I do talk with others behind the scenes.

Are you saying he doesn't believe in the survival of the fittest?
He doesn't believe in the market?

That doesn't seem to be what his documents say on his websites. What gives you the idea that its a socialist coin? I never heard of that before.

The public discussions he and I had (in his bitcointalk threads) about how everyone gets what is akin to an interest payment, and how everyone who owns the domain name coin gets a payment. He claims to be Austrian economics based, yet apparently he and I disagree about what that entails. I'd rather not rehash that here. The prior discussions are available. My summary is inaccurate I am sure. Better to go read the prior discussions.

AnonyMint

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 521

Quote from: Etlase2 on November 07, 2013, 02:04:58 AM

The bounty isn't for whether or not GPUs can mine it, the bounty is for whether or not there is a non-linear speed increase available without the memory tradeoff.

Correct the terms of the bounty disincentivized me.

Quote from: Etlase2 on November 07, 2013, 02:04:58 AM

If GPUs end up being faster, big deal, it isn't going to be an order of magnitude faster unless you have an order of magnitude increase in the memory bandwidth or in the memory available. At least, that is the presumption by my understanding.

You (and bytemaster) are apparently not factoring that the CPU does not hit its memory bandwidth (except in special situations such as using wide SIMD instructions in serial memory space which doesn't apply here because this is random lookup of saved values). Rather the CPU is limited by the order-of-magnitude slower random access memory latency, due to not having enough hardware threads.

Luckybit

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 510

Quote from: AnonyMint on November 07, 2013, 01:28:20 AM

I can't work with bytemaster because he and I don't agree. He wants to make a socialist coin where everyone receives their fair share just by sitting on their coins, and I would want to make a capitalist coin which doesn't steal (ahem redistribute) value to give to the collective of coin owners. The coin owners are already profiting from the rise in value of the coin.

I do talk with others behind the scenes.

Are you saying he doesn't believe in the survival of the fittest?
He doesn't believe in the market?

That doesn't seem to be what his documents say on his websites. What gives you the idea that its a socialist coin? I never heard of that before.

Etlase2

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

The bounty isn't for whether or not GPUs can mine it, the bounty is for whether or not there is a non-linear speed increase available without the memory tradeoff. If GPUs end up being faster, big deal, it isn't going to be an order of magnitude faster unless you have an order of magnitude increase in the memory bandwidth or in the memory available. At least, that is the presumption by my understanding.

testz

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1018

Quote from: AnonyMint on November 07, 2013, 01:59:10 AM

Quote from: testz on November 07, 2013, 01:56:14 AM

Sorry, but I can't not to answer to @AnonyMint

:
If you experienced programmer you should know that "the devil's in the details" and you should trust only proven working solutions. If you don't have time, left it, someone will make the working GPU miner for this algo and get his a well-deserved award.

PS: If you so busy, probably you get salary and you don't need this reward. IMHO

Someone can go implement what I have explained. If they want to send me a tip to be considerate that is good honor. Correct I don't need the money. I am looking to see the honor (or ethics) of the people involved.

I'm sure that if some one will implement you idea, you will get the honor from bytemaster, but let's wait for proven solution.

Topic: BitShares PTS (formerly ProtoShares) Mandatory Upgrade & Snapshot Announcement - page 53. (Read 218428 times)