Bitcoin Forum

Hello. I was suggested to ask here.

I'm diving into the new Blockchain technology, which seems like an interesting underrated concept. It is called Proof of Memory.
The core idea is to use PoW but collect hashes into the memory for some timeframe and then when it is needed QUICKLY get the best hash. It allows to mine blocks faster.
Also PoM reuses the same pre-mined hashes to validate multiple blockchains in parallel. It allows unlimited scalability.

I published mind map with my impressions on my blog:
https://trunin.com/en/2022/05/ingenius-empera-blockchain-and-pom/images/Empera_Blockchain_(PoM).pdf (https://trunin.com/en/2022/05/ingenius-empera-blockchain-and-pom/images/Empera_Blockchain_(PoM).pdf)
(src: https://trunin.com/en/2022/05/ingenius-empera-blockchain-and-pom/)

Detailed description of Proof of Memory on the project website:
https://empera.network/files/PoM-ENG.pdf (https://empera.network/files/PoM-ENG.pdf)

I want to ask the community - what do you think about it?
Is it an underrated concept to make the PoW more "green"?
Considering that the PoS has it's problems can this PoM concept give the second life to the PoW?

PoW and green won't go.

Giving people a lower chance to gain a reward overall makes things greener but also harms the security of the chain.

PoM as you call it is probably similar to what has been attempted with proof of storage/proof of space - I'm not sure how that worked except storing "plots" over a drive. (since you can mount ram as an ssd then it's probably a similar thing).

Here we go again: https://www.truthcoin.info/blog/pow-cheapest/

I honestly don't understand what's Proof-of-Memory after reading the prologue of the paper, and I'm pretty sure I won't if I continue either. Is it about incentivizing the use of GPUs in a Monero-like algorithm? Proof-of-Work in a more complicated way is potentially as much harmful as the current Proof-of-Work.

Read the link above. There's nothing cheaper than Proof-of-Work.

We have a expression that says "you circle the bite around your head before eating it". That's what PoM looks like to me. In PoM there is still a need to perform expensive computation but needs more memory, it still runs on hardware that is consuming energy and when the number of miners grows the energy consumption grows with it.

That's not to mention that fundamental of this whole this is wrong since you are assuming that "PoW needs a second life".

My guess is that it is some sort optimisation to Blind-Merged-Mining (BMM) where hashes are stored on a server (ASIC??) with sufficiently large RAM - maybe it's talking in hundreds of gigabytes or something.

Yes; in general, the conclusion is usually:

(a) You created a good system, but it's just abstracted PoW so there won't be any 'greenliness benefit' compared to 'traditional PoW'.
(b) You created a bad system, such as PoS.

You could also add that making mining less energy hungry would erase the current incentives in Bitcoin mining that motivate mining operators to go out of their way to harvest every last bit of otherwise wasted energy (since it's so cheap). Meaning less energy hungry mining schemes could potentially have little impact on the amount of energy that is (uncleanly) created, which is what ultimately matters. Like, if we have nobody who builds mining facilities near hydro plants and uses the excess energy at night, or operators buying up solar energy at noon, when nobody uses their lights, but energy production is highest, that energy will still be produced and simply go to waste.