{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1sgs97fe0n9wehe6zw7drcxdz4cy9yt9pfqjv8gasz5jlk4zezc0quppx3c","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1sgs97fe0n9wehe6zw7drcxdz4cy9yt9pfqjv8gasz5jlk4zezc0quppx3c","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2017-04-08\n📝 Original message:-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----\nHash: SHA256\n\nOn 04/08/2017 11:15 AM, praxeology_guy via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e ASICBOOST causes Bitcoin's PoW to become more memory/latency\n\u003e throttled instead of raw computation throttled.\n\u003e \n\u003e There is the equation: Power Cost + Captial Rent + Labor ~= block\n\u003e reward + fees\n\u003e \n\u003e Capital Rent is a barrier to entry, and hence in desiring a more \n\u003e distributed system, we would like to minimize the Capital Rent\n\u003e portion of the equation.\n\u003e \n\u003e Resolving memory/latency throttle requires a greater Captial Rent\n\u003e than raw computation throttle.\n\u003e \n\u003e Hence (agreeing with Luke), ASICBOOST is not desirable, even if it \n\u003e wasn't a government enforced monopoly on mining.\n\u003e \n\u003e Please let me know if I made a mistake.\n\nElectric power is not an abstraction, it's the output of machines.\nWhat you are referring to as Power Cost typically consists of a higher\nrent component than computing hardware, where rent is the sharing of a\nresource by multiple people. So by your reasoning you appear to have\ndrawn the wrong conclusion.\n\ne\n-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\nVersion: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)\n\niQEcBAEBCAAGBQJY6TEUAAoJEDzYwH8LXOFOiQIH/RN8YhLCokZtGoFZ+dOgwCxc\n/ej3m9CXVGyWvcCJMQd2ZJFgpjL5mgJdcCdaWoTeZfh0Nmvc3hDex46wWpUZc/mR\nNbRj56hyqe+cWAwQJJpAOWiJXjEuS3npXFvZIBpslECXCL6U+LSxdW9WSg0w+HBD\njihIlG2TeGSrMR/atKfSnVRAnz9ahPvgUwcR8l7oLsjP2JvBGl+fQHL5MwpvRg4a\nsXK3eMIeH7wGJyiKOwXyMeRMfCRlwpkBCw0R+FYt2Q5l/uwkRAKuJiYUlJixFAZA\nggQth02pFn/tASB49oBKZU3QviVRGgoIQ5DFyI8OPa10FeVsxaeNeBQylwWJA3c=\n=Ryo5\n-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----"}