Timeline for What computational problems would be good proof-of-work problems for cryptocurrency mining?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
28 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 3, 2019 at 19:12 | comment | added | Joseph Van Name | For the record, my updated reversible mining algorithm uses a cryptographic trick which allows the bulk of mining to be based upon simply two interacting linear feedback shift registers (LFSRs) corresponding to the primitive trinomials $x^{15}+x+1,x^{17}+x^{3}+1$ over $F_{2}$ instead of an algorithm that is reversible but still as clunky as SHA-256. These LFSRs will undoubtably require very little hardware and circuit space. | |
| Jan 3, 2019 at 18:59 | comment | added | Joseph Van Name | SHA-256, the mining algorithm for Bitcoin can be implemented reversibly with some computational overhead. There are reversible ripple carry adders which can help compute SHA-256 in arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0410184.pdf. This is not a coincidence since security characteristics of cryptographic hash functions such as collision resistance and second pre-image resistance are themselves weak forms of reversibility. Bitcoin mining will therefore unintentionally and quite suboptimally accelerate the development of the reversible computer. | |
| Jan 10, 2018 at 6:39 | comment | added | Mark.Neuhaus | I'm although interested in reasons for the downvotes! | |
| Dec 29, 2017 at 16:22 | comment | added | Joseph Van Name | I am still waiting for someone to give a coherent and legitimate explanation as to why this answer was so heavily downvoted. | |
| Dec 5, 2017 at 15:20 | comment | added | Joseph Van Name | Cryptocurrencies can also reward the development of the quantum computer; if you make a good quantum computer, then you will be allowed to take all abandoned bitcoins and all bitcoins from people who have not updated to a quantum safe digital signature algorithm yet. | |
| Oct 18, 2017 at 21:48 | comment | added | Joseph Van Name | Why the delete vote? | |
| Aug 7, 2017 at 21:52 | vote | accept | Joseph Van Name | ||
| Aug 7, 2017 at 3:33 | vote | accept | Joseph Van Name | ||
| Aug 7, 2017 at 21:52 | |||||
| Aug 7, 2017 at 3:23 | vote | accept | Joseph Van Name | ||
| Aug 7, 2017 at 3:33 | |||||
| Aug 4, 2017 at 1:43 | vote | accept | Joseph Van Name | ||
| Aug 7, 2017 at 3:22 | |||||
| S Aug 2, 2017 at 14:05 | history | notice removed | CommunityBot | ||
| S Aug 2, 2017 at 14:05 | history | unlocked | CommunityBot | ||
| S Aug 1, 2017 at 13:13 | history | notice added | Todd Trimble | Content dispute | |
| S Aug 1, 2017 at 13:13 | history | locked | Todd Trimble | ||
| Aug 1, 2017 at 13:00 | history | edited | Todd Trimble | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
removed some residual emotion
|
| Aug 1, 2017 at 12:51 | history | edited | Joseph Van Name | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 3582 characters in body
|
| Aug 1, 2017 at 10:50 | history | edited | Joseph Van Name | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 169 characters in body
|
| Jul 31, 2017 at 17:21 | history | edited | Joseph Van Name | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 256 characters in body
|
| Jul 31, 2017 at 1:51 | comment | added | Yoav Kallus | Don't worry. If I thought so I would have. | |
| Jul 30, 2017 at 4:11 | history | edited | Joseph Van Name | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 147 characters in body
|
| Jul 30, 2017 at 3:51 | history | edited | Joseph Van Name | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 5429 characters in body
|
| Jul 30, 2017 at 3:42 | vote | accept | Joseph Van Name | ||
| Aug 4, 2017 at 1:43 | |||||
| Jul 30, 2017 at 3:42 | history | undeleted | Joseph Van Name | ||
| Jun 7, 2017 at 15:27 | history | deleted | Joseph Van Name | via Vote | |
| Jun 2, 2017 at 0:56 | comment | added | Yoav Kallus | Well, you think that chess endgames are silly. We all have our unpopular opinions. | |
| Jun 1, 2017 at 17:58 | comment | added | Yoav Kallus | First, you wrote, "Intrinsic value: The solution to the problems must have some intrinsic value. These solutions and not just the process of obtaining the solutions should be of a scientific, mathematical or practical interest." (emphasis added). Second, logical reversibility is not, contrary to popular perception, a prerequisite for thermodynamic reversibility. A logically irreversible operation can be performed in a thermodynamically reversible way (see doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsb.2004.11.006 and arxiv.org/abs/1508.05319). | |
| May 29, 2017 at 22:33 | vote | accept | Joseph Van Name | ||
| Jun 4, 2017 at 16:34 | |||||
| May 29, 2017 at 17:59 | history | answered | Joseph Van Name | CC BY-SA 3.0 |