Money is power to buy other people's labor. There are many ways to gain this power, by force, cheat or voluntary exchange.
I think using proof-of-work is more a sociological choice than science. In modern democratic societies, labor-for-labor exchange is most acceptable to the majority of people. If bitcoin were invented 200 years ago, the issuance of new coins might be decided differently, say by how much King George pooped in any given day.
Topic: conjecture about proof-of-work and cryptocurrencies - page 3. (Read 8271 times)
Perhaps in the future, as bitcoin becomes used extensively and the transaction volume becomes much greater, there will be plenty of "work" just growing the block chain, and the difficulty factor can be reduced accordingly. This way, more energy is put into supporting commerce and less into finding a hash with an arbitrary number of zeros.
Not sure if it's even possible, but it would be REALLY nice if somehow we can integrate bitcoin's proof-of-work with seti@home's computation. http://boinc.berkeley.edu/
then I'll feel much better about the energy I consumed on my mining rigs.
EDIT: Never mind, apparently this has been discussed: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/wasted-computations-and-grid-computing-203 https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/usefulness-of-the-work-performed-335 I need to clarify that I think bitcoin-mining is like gold-mining, the energy is NOT "wasted", it's a necessary evil dealing with the weakness of humanity.
then I'll feel much better about the energy I consumed on my mining rigs.
EDIT: Never mind, apparently this has been discussed: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/wasted-computations-and-grid-computing-203 https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/usefulness-of-the-work-performed-335 I need to clarify that I think bitcoin-mining is like gold-mining, the energy is NOT "wasted", it's a necessary evil dealing with the weakness of humanity.
As you know many people don't like the idea of using CPU power in order to make so-called "useless" computations.
I suspect it is possible to rigorously prove that any cryptocurrencies, providing it fulfills a few conditions, has to be based on proof-of-work, and thus on CPU.
So far I can't prove it seriously, so it is just a conjecture. I'd be glad if someone with a solid maths and IT background could bring a demonstration.
So it would look like:
Obviously this relies on a theoretical, more general definition of "cryptocurrency". I won't give such a definition here but I guess you get the idea.
I suspect it is possible to rigorously prove that any cryptocurrencies, providing it fulfills a few conditions, has to be based on proof-of-work, and thus on CPU.
So far I can't prove it seriously, so it is just a conjecture. I'd be glad if someone with a solid maths and IT background could bring a demonstration.
So it would look like:
Quote from: grondilu
If a cryptocurrency respects the folowing criteria:
* it doesn't discriminate any node of the network ;
* the initial monetary amount available in the network is zero (apart from the genesis block) ;
Then at any time, the probability of generation of a new monetary unit for any node is proportionnal to the CPU of this node.
* it doesn't discriminate any node of the network ;
* the initial monetary amount available in the network is zero (apart from the genesis block) ;
Then at any time, the probability of generation of a new monetary unit for any node is proportionnal to the CPU of this node.
Obviously this relies on a theoretical, more general definition of "cryptocurrency". I won't give such a definition here but I guess you get the idea.
Jump to: