Proof of Work - Bitcoin Wiki

Primecoin

Discussion about Primecoin and its infra. Primecoin is a very innovative cryptocurrency, being the 1st non Hash-Cash PoW crypto, naturally scarce (not artificially), with very fast confirmations (1min), elastic readjusting reward & a useful mining (byproducts are primes). Primecoin is sustainable (miners are guaranteed to have revenues), and decentralized (ASIC/FPGA are not particularly advantaged). Sidechain for decentralized data applications (e.g. Storj) currently in development.
[link]

Primecoin

Primecoin is an innovative cryptocurrency, a form of digital currency secured by cryptography and issued through a decentralized mining market. Derived from Satoshi Nakamoto's Bitcoin, Primecoin introduces an unique form of proof-of-work based on searching for prime numbers.
[link]

VeriCoin

The home for the most innovative cryptocurrency, VeriCoin and Verium VeriCoin: Proof-of-Stake-Time Protocol. PoST Verified. Verium: Proof-of-Work-Time Protocol. PoWT Verified. CPU Mine-able (GPU and ASIC Resistant)
[link]

Boost POW: a protocol for buying proof-of-work from Bitcoin miners.

submitted by DanielKrawisz to bitcoincashSV [link] [comments]

Will miners be motivated to step in and power diesel generators to mine Bitcoin, Litecoin, and other Proof-of-Work coins? Seems logical as oil prices will likely drop--or remain suppressed, in coming months

Will miners be motivated to step in and power diesel generators to mine Bitcoin, Litecoin, and other Proof-of-Work coins? Seems logical as oil prices will likely drop--or remain suppressed, in coming months submitted by Kipyegonn to litecoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin explained in plain English (so that you can explain this voodoo magic money to your mom)

Bitcoin explained in plain English
Like Paypal and Visa, Bitcoin is a system that can send money digitally. The innovation that sets Bitcoin apart is that it isn’t controlled or operated by a single company. Instead of having a company like Visa run the system, anybody can join the Bitcoin network and participate in the record keeping that keeps Bitcoin running. Nobody owns the Bitcoin software or the Bitcoin network. If an oppressive government wants to shut down Bitcoin, it can’t simply go after a single company. An oppressive government would (in theory) have to go after everybody running Bitcoin server software on their computer to shut it down.
In practice, the decentralization doesn’t actually work. Most people buy Bitcoins through exchanges run by private companies, which are subject to government-imposed laws and regulations. While Bitcoin’s innovation is interesting, it doesn’t actually do anything useful in the real world. However, very few people actually understand Bitcoin. So, journalists and cryptocurrency fanatics can make up fancy stories about how Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies will change the world.
What Bitcoin is
Bitcoin was originally designed to be a “Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System“. Think of other peer-to-peer systems like Napster or BitTorrent, except that users can exchange Bitcoins instead of files. Instead of having a single set of records controlled by one company, the set of records is copied to all the volunteer record keepers in the Bitcoin network. There can be hundreds or thousands of copies of the Bitcoin ledger distributed around the world. Changes to the ledger (from people sending Bitcoin to one another) are distributed throughout the network and each participant duplicates the record-keeping process on their copy of the ledger. This is the “distributed ledger” that everybody keeps talking about.
All of this means that the Bitcoin network can run by itself. Anybody can join the network and help keep it running.
Bitcoin in the real world
Unfortunately the key benefit to Bitcoin (the “decentralization” everybody keeps talking about) doesn’t actually pan out in the real world. Most people get Bitcoins by buying them via a centralized exchange, which are all private companies that can be shut down or bullied by the government. As all developed countries have laws against money laundering, banks will enforce these laws and will refuse to do business with exchanges that may be enabling questionable activities like online gambling with Bitcoins. Cryptocurrencies are effectively regulated by governments around the world. The only practical alternative to exchanges is to trade Bitcoins in person. However, this defeats the main benefit of digital money as face-to-face transactions are inconvenient. It’s unlikely that a system that involves trading paper money for Bitcoins will revolutionize the world.
Currently, the trend is that banks and credit card companies have been cutting off access to Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. Banks have to comply with anti-money laundering regulations so that they don’t intentionally or unintentionally help criminals profit from illegal activities. A key part of fighting money laundering is knowing who your customers actually are. Criminals are less likely to use a bank as part of their illegal activities (e.g. to trade stolen Bitcoins for cash) if the bank knows their true identity. However, Bitcoin was designed to be anonymous as stated by its inventor’s white paper. (Bitcoin doesn’t fully succeed in allowing for anonymous payments. However, the anonymity that it does offer is enough to be problematic.) Bitcoin’s design makes it difficult for banks to obey the law if they are to allow access to Bitcoin exchanges. This is one of the many reasons why Bitcoin is unlikely to become a mainstream payment method for goods and services.
You can safely ignore the hype
If somebody tries to explain Bitcoin to you and you don’t understand it, the problem isn’t you. The person explaining Bitcoin likely has some misguided understanding of Bitcoin because there are certain things that they want to believe. Some people want to look smart by being early believers in new technology that they don’t understand. Some journalists want to write clickbait stories. Some people want to believe in get-rich-quick schemes. Some people are getting rich quick through cryptocurrency-related scams. Whatever the case is, I wouldn’t worry about it. You aren’t missing out on a revolutionary new technology. Bitcoin’s only innovation is interesting but useless in the real world.
Appendix A: What Bitcoin mining is (and why everybody is saying it’s bad for the environment)
The problem with a set of records delivered over the Internet is that you don’t know if some stranger on the Internet has nefariously tampered with the version that they sent you. It is possible for somebody to cheat the system by spending Bitcoins and then distributing a copy of the ledger that leaves out their spending, allowing them to spend their Bitcoins again. Other users somehow have to figure out which version of history is correct. To prevent shenanigans, each node on the Bitcoin network will determine trust based on “proof of work“. Trust will go to the side that has spent/wasted the most computing power to back up their version of events. The theory is that the honest users will always control more computing power than dishonest users.
To perform proof of work, Bitcoin “miners” do a set of very difficult mathematical calculations to try to find results with a certain number of zeroes in it. It’s basically computers competing over their ability to produce special numbers with a really long series of zeroes. Record keepers in the Bitcoin network (“nodes”) will trust the side that has wasted the most computing power. Because the math needed to find the special numbers is much harder than the math needed to verify the numbers (sort of like how Sudoku puzzles are harder to solve than to check), participants can easily verify which side wasted the most computing power. This is the key idea behind “blockchain“, the technology that tries to solve the problem of not being able to trust what strangers send you over the Internet. Honest record keepers will continue to add valid pages (blocks) to the Bitcoin journal. If the honest side controls more computing power, they will produce a longer chain of valid pages (blocks) than dishonest record keepers. Eventually, the honest record keepers’ version of events will be considered the authoritative one.
This system works as long as honest users throw more computing power at the problem than dishonest users. A dishonest user cannot pass off a bogus version of events (such as one that omits their spending) unless that user has more computing power than all of the honest users combined. To make attacks from dishonest users very difficult, the Bitcoin system provides incentives to its users to maintain a large standing army of computers that are ready to waste more computing power than people trying to cheat the system. Bitcoins are given out to users who devote computing power towards the Bitcoin cause. This is called Bitcoin “mining”, as the miners exert effort and are rewarded with digital “gold”. The creation of new Bitcoins is part of Bitcoin’s design.
If Bitcoin’s price averages $10,000, Bitcoin miners will receive $6.57 billion dollars worth of newly-printed Bitcoins in 2018 (1800 Bitcoins will be created every day in 2018). Bitcoin miners will also receive transaction fees from people who pay extra to have their transactions added to the ledger first (their transactions will be confirmed first). This might sound crazy but Bitcoin mining is on track to being a multi-billion dollar industry. Various companies will fight over their share of newly-printed Bitcoins. Competition will cause them to use a lot of electricity since electricity is the main ingredient needed to mine Bitcoins. Digiconomist has a webpage that estimates Bitcoin’s power consumption, which is currently about 1.3% of the United State’s energy consumption- that’s the same as millions of Americans. Bitcoin mining will consume as much energy as entire countries like Bangladesh.
While Bitcoin mining is one way to get Bitcoins, it is very expensive for most people compared to buying Bitcoins on an exchange. This is because Bitcoin mining benefits from scale. Big companies such as Bitmain will spend millions of dollars on designing computers that do one thing and one thing only: mine Bitcoins. Think of a calculator: it is a computer that does only one thing. Because it is designed for only one task, it does it very well. A calculator is incredibly energy efficient and cheap compared to your smartphone or laptop computer. Similarly, a computer that is designed specifically for mining Bitcoins does it more cost-effectively than everyday computers. Without millions of dollars spent designing special computers, access to very cheap electricity, and large data centers, normal citizens can’t compete against Bitcoin mining juggernauts. These companies drive up the cost of mining Bitcoins (Bitcoin is designed so that fewer Bitcoins are produced if more computing power is spent on mining), pushing out the small fish. You will likely lose money if you try to mine Bitcoin on your home computer.
Appendix B: Buzzwords and technobabble explained
ICO: Initial coin offering, or “it’s a con offering”. Generally speaking, these are investment scams where investors exchange real money for fake money (or a stake in a fake business or Ponzi scheme).
Immutable: can’t be changed. In theory, Bitcoin is designed so that the ledger can’t be changed. In the past, the ledger has been changed by the Bitcoin community banding together to fix bugs. One such bug allowed a hacker to give him or herself 184 billion Bitcoins.
Trustless: This refers to a trust problem that only decentralized systems have; centralized systems don’t have this problem. For Bitcoin specifically, the problem is this: some stranger on the Internet sent me a journal of all Bitcoin transactions and I don’t know if I should trust it. Bitcoin’s key innovative technology, the blockchain, attempts to solve that problem so that decentralization can work.
Blockchain: a journal of all (Bitcoin) transactions since the very beginning. Transactions are grouped together into chunks called blocks, which form the ‘pages’ of the journal. Miners solve difficult math puzzles so that they can attach special numbers to each block, proving that they spent a lot of computing power. A series (or chain) of blocks with the most computing power spent on ‘proving’ that chain will become the authoritative blockchain. This system works as long as the honest users waste more computer power and electricity than dishonest users.
Decentralization: a system that works without a trusted central authority.
Double spending: Cheating the system to spend the same Bitcoin two or more times, ultimately resulting in spending Bitcoins that you don’t have.
Secure: An adjective that describes systems other than Bitcoin. For starters, Bitcoin was hacked to create 184 billion Bitcoins. When the Mt. Gox exchange was hacked, at least 5% of all Bitcoins at the time (at least 650,000) were stolen. Many people also lose Bitcoins due to their computer being hacked, being tricked into giving away their passwords or identity, or from malicious browser add-ons. Bitcoin also has outstanding security issues that haven’t been fixed. If a single party controls 51% of the world’s Bitcoin mining power, that mining power can be used to disrupt the Bitcoin network. Currently, more than 51% of the world’s mining power is controlled by Chinese companies.
submitted by glennchan to Buttcoin [link] [comments]

Actions by the Bitcoin Cash and Ethereum community members seem to overrule Proof-of-Work miners’ outrageous proposals like mining tax and ProgPow. With most from China, does this mean their reign is over?

Actions by the Bitcoin Cash and Ethereum community members seem to overrule Proof-of-Work miners’ outrageous proposals like mining tax and ProgPow. With most from China, does this mean their reign is over? submitted by Kipyegonn to Crypto_Currency_News [link] [comments]

Erik Voorhees: "Changing Bitcoin's proof-of-work to prevent miners from mining is the most absurd and reckless thing I've heard in the scaling debate."

Erik Voorhees: submitted by Egon_1 to btc [link] [comments]

Erik Voorhees: "Changing Bitcoin's proof-of-work to prevent miners from mining is the most absurd and reckless thing I've heard in the scaling debate."

Erik Voorhees: submitted by liquorstorevip to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

For regular Lightning Network transactions, no proof of work is being performed, no miner has to mine anything and nothing is happening in the ACTUAL Bitcoin blockchain.

Let's say you find a coffee merchant who accepts LN transactions, so you open a channel with him and fund it with $500. You're hoping to get a $5 coffee everyday for the next 100 days (forget about the fees, let's generously assume they're negligible.)
After the funds have been spent up you're planning to close the channel.
Question: In order for these 100 transactions to occur, how many transactions will actually be included in the Bitcoin blockchain, requiring proof of work to be done by miners?
Answer: Two. Just two. One when you open the channel and one when you close the channel.
For all the other transacting that is taking place, no actual Bitcoins are being moved, no actual proof of work is being performed and no miner has to do anything, at all.
Literally, miners will just be on standby to open and close the channels.
Another example:
Let's say the demand for Bitcoin transactions in the future is 100 tx/s. Even generously assuming full segwit usage, the ACTUAL BTC BLOCKCHAIN is limited to 5 tx/s.
So what percentage of the transacting taking place on the network are actual Bitcoin transactions?
Answer: 5%. The other 95% of the volume would be happening OFF CHAIN, NOT being mined, NOT using proof of work, NOT detectable in the BTC blockchain.
It would seem to me that the scaling roadmap of BTC is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT than anything described in the white paper or any of Satoshi's writings.
So for core proponents who claim Bitcoin BTC is closer to Satoshi's vision than BCH is, can you please explain to us how restricting usage of the ACTUAL blockchain in order to arbitrarily push all volume onto a proprietary second layer solution which is NOT based on proof of work, does NOT need to be mined and is NOT visible in the blockchain is what Satoshi described?
Doesn't that kind of seem to be removing the very essence of what makes Bitcoin, Bitcoin!?
The system is supposed to be based on proof of work, so how is doing away with proof of work, consistent with the Bitcoin system!?
submitted by poorbrokebastard to btc [link] [comments]

Irony/Comedy Gold: bitcoin.org: "Note that Bitcoin is not ruled by miners, and miner actions cannot be used as a justification to redefine Bitcoin", Bitcoin Whitepaper: "The proof-of-work also solves the problem of determining representation in majority decision making."

You really can't make this shit up. I'm actually astonished Core has managed to get so far with any considerable following with clearly and blatantly anti-Bitcoin stances intensifying every step of the way. They've made it official - they're trying to destroy Bitcoin as defined by Satoshi Nakamoto in the whitepaper, anyone who doesn't see this by now has to have mush instead of a brain.
WOW, that's some high level trolling of a $72 Billion network. Can't believe this is happening actually.
sources: bitcoin.org Bitcoin Whitepaper [page 3]
submitted by mushner to btc [link] [comments]

Bitcoin's Hidden Proof-of-Work Asset -- Miners buy Bitcoins with electricity via PoW. This data can reveal a brand new asset.

Bitcoin's Hidden Proof-of-Work Asset -- Miners buy Bitcoins with electricity via PoW. This data can reveal a brand new asset. submitted by RubenSomsen to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

The Whitepaper Series Part 2: Proof of Work, Network, and Incentive. We explore the parts of the whitepaper that Core don't want you to know exist, as well as talk about the Bangkok miner's meeting, the Bitcoin Core inflation bug, and the Bitcoin Files Protocol.

The Whitepaper Series Part 2: Proof of Work, Network, and Incentive. We explore the parts of the whitepaper that Core don't want you to know exist, as well as talk about the Bangkok miner's meeting, the Bitcoin Core inflation bug, and the Bitcoin Files Protocol. submitted by The_BCH_Boys to btc [link] [comments]

[Informational] [CC0] 100% Proof of Stake

Proof of Stake

The Bitcoin Blockchain's security model rests on a pillar known as proof of work, a protocol in which updates require provable expenditure of resources. In proving the expenditure of resources, two limitations are imposed: time is required to prove a significant expenditure, and the expenditure has no other purpose than to be spent. Addressing those limitations has been the subject of much thought and effort, and the proof of stake system has been proposed as an alternative, although no workable system of proof of stake has been devised and there are strong doubts as to its feasibility at all.
In an advanced proof of work system like Bitcoin, minor elements similar to proof-of-stake are used to add additional security on top of the pure proof of work. Bitcoin miners must invest millions of dollars in their equipment, must study Bitcoin and commit and develop fixed resources to their mining operations beyond electricity, must wait sixteen hours to trade their mining rewards, in an ongoing process that ties a miner to the fate of Bitcoin. Bitcoin in the past has also experimented with proof-of-stake signaling using coin age, the time since funds last moved. At one point it was thought that this signal might be used to determine transaction priority.

Motivation for Proof of Stake over Proof of Work

Proof of work requires that work be done to satisfy that a double spend be costly. However proof of stake argues that this cost might be a waste. Given a small set of stakeholders who are financially invested in the health of their investment, maybe simply trusting in their prudent judgement would be warranted? If true, this would save a great deal of energy expenditure. Energy creation and use generally carries a negative connotation due to its common correlation with abuses of the environment. Although Bitcoin's design merely favors the least expensive source of energy possible, many power creation methods create unwanted externalities of cost, making energy itself a loaded word.
In a proof of work design, miners are not trusted, only their work, as verified by cryptographic math. Given that the work takes time, this introduces a cost to using the system: waiting for sufficient work. Proof of stake argues that trusting individuals based on their stake vastly increases the speed of proof: miners merely signal their view, their identity serving as their proof, without any significant time restriction.
Proof of work designs generally use a rewards based system based on time decreasing rewards, as a bootstrapping method to quickly create enough security for transacting. But this limited variable may also serve to mask a lurking challenge, what happens after the rewards disappear? Merely the presence of this quandary presents a challenge to the confidence in Bitcoin: fees amount to a variable seen to easily change or never be sufficient, with potentially destructive consequences. In a proof-of-stake system, the purpose of a block reward is muted, removing a variable to consider when thinking about the long term future of the system.
An additional proof of work issue in the long term is the anticipation of a phase in which renting proof of work becomes possible. An attacker who might rent enough hash power to double spend their transactions might be able to shield themselves from the future repercussions a standard miner with their own hash power equipment would suffer. If proof of stake could be made to work, attackers might find acquiring a majority stake made them prohibitively exposed to future downturns in the currency value, dis-incentivizing them from exhibiting behavior detrimental to the currency value.
From a valuation perspective, proof of work may be seen to present a constant negative pressure on the valuation. Miners are incentivized to compete to the edge of profitability, meaning that fees and block rewards must trend towards a real world exchange, meaning value must be constantly exiting the system, pushing the currency valuation ever downwards. A proof of stake system might be more static without the need for a real world exchange to keep it in operation.

Methods of Proof of Stake

Proof of stake is the type of concept where people try to work backwards from an idea that would potentially fix issues, to figuring out how that idea might be made to work. Over time much effort and code has gone into writing proposals and preparing proofs of concept, but no generally accepted method to making proof of stake work has ever been achieved.
Generally all methods of proof of stake confront a basic issue straight away: reproducing the randomness of a proof of work's miner selection process. All proof of stake methods use some arbitrary random element to select stakeholders to be chosen to update their ledgers. One implementation is to give each stakeholder a counter since their last block, progressively increasing a chance to win a block. This method incentivizes coin age.
An alternative version of proof of stake is to hold miner elections using stake voting. The elected miners are then sorted randomly for mining blocks. This method can be problematic if a bloc of miners uses social engineering to convince the stakeholders they should be awarded mining power.

Proof of Stake Problems

The principle proof of stake issue is that without a specific cost to create a double spend attack, merchants cannot really rely on a quantifiable incentive against them occurring. Even more troubling, given a disagreement between multiple competing chains, stakeholders have no need to only select a single chain to vote for, making for a potential voting deadlock. This issue is known as the nothing at stake problem and no direct solution has ever been suggested, however many mitigating tactics have been proposed and implemented.
Another significant problem with proof of stake is the coin distribution problem. In a proof of work, an open process may take place over decades where coins are distributed to anyone who cares to mine. In a proof of stake, how to distribute the coins equitably? No equitable answer has been presented, but two practical solutions have appeared: depending on an initial mining period for distribution and selling the initial coins in an initial coin offering.
An initial coin offering suggests an inequitable distribution, so these offerings are seen as potentially unfair or centralizing. Wealth itself is often seen to be inherently centralizing over time, so proof of stake may easily follow the general pattern of wealth: a power law distribution of block updating invested in minute upper echelon.
A critical problem with proof of stake is the issue with defeating a fifty one percent attack. In a proof of work system, a nuclear option to prevent miners betraying the user base is the option to simply alter the proof of work to shake up the composition of miners. In a proof of stake system, miners and owners of the currency are equivalent, meaning that the alteration of the stakeholders requires massive and complex disruption to the composition of coin ownership.
Some proof of stake proposals promote the position that developers themselves represent a check in the system. In these proposals developers broadcast to nodes trusted block checkpoints, preventing long chain reorganization attacks. This however creates an extreme point of centralization around the developer, a point of weakness for these systems since developers may easily be complicit in an attack.
https://thebookofbitcoin.github.io/html/software/proof_of_stake.html
submitted by pb1x to writingforbitcoin [link] [comments]

Dan tweets: Now that NY power companies are charging crypto miners more than other electric companies, they are directly profiting from the distribution of new Bitcoin, Eth, and other proof of work coins.

Dan tweets: Now that NY power companies are charging crypto miners more than other electric companies, they are directly profiting from the distribution of new Bitcoin, Eth, and other proof of work coins. submitted by Crypto_VixCyn to eos [link] [comments]

With BITCOIN changing from “proof of work” to “proof of capacity”. Fork begins January 31st 2018. Bringing the birth of “Bitcoin Ore”. What does this mean for S9 miners and Gpu miners

With BITCOIN changing from “proof of work” to “proof of capacity”. Fork begins January 31st 2018. Bringing the birth of “Bitcoin Ore”. What does this mean for S9 miners and Gpu miners submitted by DrewFriday to BitcoinMining [link] [comments]

Proposal: Malice Reactive Proof of Work Additions (MR POWA) - Protecting Bitcoin from malicious miners

Proposal: Malice Reactive Proof of Work Additions (MR POWA) - Protecting Bitcoin from malicious miners submitted by johnhardy-seebitcoin to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin's Hidden Proof-of-Work Asset -- Miners buy Bitcoins with electricity via PoW. This data can reveal a brand new asset.

Bitcoin's Hidden Proof-of-Work Asset -- Miners buy Bitcoins with electricity via PoW. This data can reveal a brand new asset. submitted by RubenSomsen to BitcoinDiscussion [link] [comments]

Calvin Ayre: "The only path to salvation for the bitcoin mining industry is through scaling and that only means Bitcoin SV. Already I am being attacked by ABC trolls for being pro proof of work...this is INSANE! If you are a miner you need to take a stand."

Calvin Ayre: submitted by satoshi_vision to bitcoincashSV [link] [comments]

Calvin Ayre: "The only path to salvation for the bitcoin mining industry is through scaling and that only means Bitcoin SV. Already I am being attacked by ABC trolls for being pro proof of work...this is INSANE! If you are a miner you need to take a stand."

Calvin Ayre: submitted by ABitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Calvin Ayre: "The only path to salvation for the bitcoin mining industry is through scaling and that only means Bitcoin SV. Already I am being attacked by ABC trolls for being pro proof of work...this is INSANE! If you are a miner you need to take a stand."

Calvin Ayre: submitted by cryptoallbot to cryptoall [link] [comments]

BCH adding CTOR -> preconsensus (neuters miner signalling), checkpoints (which neuters the idea of Proof of Work) and planning other non-Bitcoin changes like new OPCodes (potential to make the coin illegal) make BCH an alt-coin now. This sub ONLY supports Bitcoin. That is SV today.

BCH adding CTOR -> preconsensus (neuters miner signalling), checkpoints (which neuters the idea of Proof of Work) and planning other non-Bitcoin changes like new OPCodes (potential to make the coin illegal) make BCH an alt-coin now. This sub ONLY supports Bitcoin. That is SV today. submitted by cryptoallbot to cryptoall [link] [comments]

BCH adding CTOR -> preconsensus (neuters miner signalling), checkpoints (which neuters the idea of Proof of Work) and planning other non-Bitcoin changes like new OPCodes (potential to make the coin illegal) make BCH an alt-coin now. This sub ONLY supports Bitcoin. That is SV today.

submitted by coincrazyy to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

The Whitepaper Series Part 2: Proof of Work, Network, and Incentive. We explore the parts of the whitepaper that Core don't want you to know exist, as well as talk about the Bangkok miner's meeting, the Bitcoin Core inflation bug, and the Bitcoin Files Protocol.

The Whitepaper Series Part 2: Proof of Work, Network, and Incentive. We explore the parts of the whitepaper that Core don't want you to know exist, as well as talk about the Bangkok miner's meeting, the Bitcoin Core inflation bug, and the Bitcoin Files Protocol. submitted by ABitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

How do miners/node operators feel about this quote? "If my group of like-minded supporters do hard fork Bitcoin, we will also likely change the proof of work to something that is most suited to general purpose CPUs rather than GPUs or ASICs." - Roger Ver

it continues "I suspect that will be a real wakeup call to the current Bitcoin miners and hardware manufacturers that the market clearly needs and wants Bitcoin to be allowed to scale." Question 3 https://steemit.com/life/@wadepaterson/20-questions-with-roger-ver-exclusive-interview
submitted by Hernzzzz to btc [link] [comments]

Best Bitcoin Mining Site  Without Investment  Payment Proof! Bitcoin Miner software Free Download🤑With Payment Proof ... Bitcoin - Proof of work - YouTube Bitcoin Mining 2019 Blockchain Proof of Power - YouTube Bitcoin Miner software Free Download🤑With Payment Proof ...

Proof of Work in Kürze. Proof of Work ist ein Konsensmodell. Es reguliert, wie neue Blöcke von Minern an die fortlaufende Blockchain angehängt werden. Miner erhalten eine bestimmte Anzahl von Coins pro Block als Belohnung. Zuschlagerhält jeweils der Miner mit der größten Rechenpower. Bitcoin, die bekannteste Kryptowährung, basiert auf ... The Bitcoin proof of work algorithm attempts to solve a puzzle with a low probability of success per trial. 3. A miner uses a candidate block header as the input, hashes it to check whether the hash value is below a target. If not, the miner changes the nonce in the block header and tries again. Once the hash value is below the target, the block has been successfully mined. 4. In order for a ... The most widely used proof-of-work scheme is based on SHA-256 and was introduced as a part of Bitcoin. Some other hashing algorithms that are used for proof-of-work include Scrypt , Blake-256 , CryptoNight , HEFTY1 , Quark , SHA-3 , scrypt-jane , scrypt-n, and combinations thereof. Das Grundprinzip von Proof of Work basiert auf der Idee, dass Miner im Netzwerk nachweisen müssen, dass sie einen gewissen Aufwand aufgebracht haben. Auch für den E-Mail Versand wurden früher Proof-of-Work-Mechanismen eingesetzt, um Spam zu verhindern. Um eine E-Mail zu versenden, musste der Sender vereinfacht gesagt zusätzliche Berechnungen durchführen. Da die Maschinen in ihrer ... Bitcoin uses the hashcash proof of work. One application of this idea is using hashcash as a method to preventing email spam, requiring a proof of work on the email's contents (including the To address), on every email. Legitimate emails will be able to do the work to generate the proof easily (not much work is required for a single email), but mass spam emailers will have difficulty ...

[index] [42737] [22575] [1202] [18544] [25139] [39355] [8640] [29510] [26552] [37152]

Best Bitcoin Mining Site Without Investment Payment Proof!

Free Download Bitcoin Mining Software: Link 1: https://nippyshare.com/v/875f8c Link 2: https://mega.nz/file/N0F2RLjR#w1EBrMuVtyDQn_jnhYIgh5QiiLObLk4x4K9sxqrz... Does China control Bitcoin mining? Should we change the proof-of-work to solve this? These questions are from the second, third, and fourth sessions of MOOC 11, which took place on February 7th ... I'm going to talking about top free best bitcoin mining website, and I'm gonna tell you every steps to get bitcoin mining! In this video I'm showing how to m... Share your videos with friends, family, and the world Bitcoin Tutorial #9 - Proof of Work - Mining - Duration: 8:29. The Morpheus Tutorials 3,317 views. 8:29. Language: English Location: United States Restricted Mode: Off History Help

#