{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1raukftn2mkv6hkvhgm04tmtn0sknuc5pfzedsflz58jxved654xqe8mlyu","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1raukftn2mkv6hkvhgm04tmtn0sknuc5pfzedsflz58jxved654xqe8mlyu","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2021-03-05\n📝 Original message:Hi, this isn't about the energy efficient argument in regards to renewables\nor mining devices but a better cryptography layer to get the most out of\nyour hashing for validation. I do understand the arbitrariness of it, but\ndo want to still propose a document. Do I use the Media Wiki format on\nGitHub and just attach it as my proposal?\n\nBest regards, Andrew\n\nOn Fri, Mar 5, 2021, 10:07 AM Devrandom \u003cc1.devrandom at niftybox.net\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e Hi Ryan and Andrew,\n\u003e\n\u003e On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 5:42 AM Ryan Grant via bitcoin-dev \u003c\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e   https://www.truthcoin.info/blog/pow-cheapest/\n\u003e\u003e     \"Nothing is Cheaper than Proof of Work\"\n\u003e\u003e     on | 04 Aug 2015\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e Just to belabor this a bit, the paper demonstrates that the mining market\n\u003e will tend to expend resources equivalent to miner reward.  It does not\n\u003e prove that mining work has to expend *energy* as a primary cost.\n\u003e\n\u003e Some might argue that energy expenditure has negative externalities and\n\u003e that we should move to other resources.  I would argue that the negative\n\u003e externalities will go away soon because of the move to renewables, so the\n\u003e point is likely moot.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20210305/c345b12f/attachment.html\u003e"}