« Une devise à laquelle chaque unité est cryptée à votre nom. »  |
|
|
|
I wish I was better at C++ programming. And basically I wish I had worked harder at school so I can have a PhD... But if you're not like me and you know C++ well, if you live in Europe, if you're looking for a job, and if you have professional experience in software development, you may be lucky enough to work for one of the most ambitious scientific endeavor of this century. The Human Brain Project is hiring: https://www.humanbrainproject.eu/participate/jobs |
|
|
|
|
Wow. Talk about necrothreading.
|
|
|
|
Et tu connais personnellement les membres de la fondation ?
Quand je lisais "on ne sait même pas qui est derrière", j'ai cru un moment que ça voulait dire "on ne sait même pas qui est derrière bitcoin". Auquel cas ma réponse c'est: il n'y a personne derrière. Y'a les développeurs qui rédigent le code, mais on n'a pas à savoir qui ils sont. La seule chose qui importe, c'est le code qu'ils produisent. Maintenant si ils parlent de la fondation bitcoin, ça me parait encore moins pertinent. C'est une fondation qui justement cherche à être reconnue, donc on sait qui sont les membres et les dirigeants. Enfin moi je ne sais pas, mais en tout cas l'information est publique pour qui veut la chercher. C'est comme les associations en France j'imagine: elles sont déclarées et les fondateurs doivent donner leur nom et leur adresse. Ou alors je me méprends complètement sur ce qu'est la fondation bitcoin, mais de toute façon dans la communauté dès le début son importance a été jugée très relative. |
|
|
|
|
"Sa gestion est complètement opaque, on ne sait même pas qui est derrière"
Ce genre de citation est affligeante. C'est incroyable quand même. Est-ce si difficile de comprendre que bitcoin est un logiciel, que le code source est libre, et que donc ça n'a rien d'opaque? Et il n'y a pas besoin d'avoir un être humain pour gérer le système. On n'est plus au XIXème siècle, quand même.
La gestion est automatisée selon un protocole tout ce qu'il y a de plus transparent.
|
|
|
|
« When I ask for his name and nationality, he’s so spooked that he refuses to answer any other questions and we lose contact for a month. » Unfuckingbelievable. You gotta be seriously dumb to ask a drug dealer his name.  |
|
|
|
Computing a Lagrangian for a given path is fast and straightforward. Finding the path that gives a local or global minimum is the hard part.
Basically there would be a public database of known optimals for a whole bunch of Lagrangians. Whenever someone breaks the currently known record, he gets the point.
So you're not actually trying to compute a global minimum, you're merely trying to compute a better path than the existing record. That's not too bad a way to find a global minimum, because if someone ever finds it, he will always find a better path than the existing record. This still sounds vulnerable to offline processing, and seems like one could easily cheat and expend very little computation when a new Lagrangian is introduced (and if new Lagrangians can't be introduced, then difficulty will behave very weirdly as optimal or close-to-optimal solutions are eventually found & also not be very useful in non-coin applications).
I'm not convinced by this "offline processing" argument. It's not too hard to evaluate the pertinence of a Lagrangian, for instance with the existing performances of the path proposed so far. Say you make your offline processing on your secretly chosen Lagrangians. Once you found the global minima, you publish the Lagrangians but keep the paths secret. 1. since you keep the optimal paths secrets, some other miner can beat the paths you proposed at anytime. 2. your set of lagrangians is probably only a tiny subset of all the accepted lagrangians (unless you have a really huge computing power, or your Lagrangians are really easy to solve, in which case honest miners will ignore them) 3 whenever you publish your paths, assuming your Lagrangians are interesting, then you will provide valuable info and if you are rewarded for your offline work, that's totally fair. But more generally offline work is probably not a big threat against any cryptocurrency. It's quite unlikely that a lone miner could outperform the rest of the collaborative network and come out with a better chain made on his own. |
|
|
|
So you're not actually trying to compute a global minimum, you're merely trying to compute a better path than the existing record. This still sounds vulnerable to offline processing, and seems like one could easily cheat and expend very little computation when a new Lagrangian is introduced (and if new Lagrangians can't be introduced, then difficulty will behave very weirdly as optimal or close-to-optimal solutions are eventually found & also not be very useful in non-coin applications).
There is not just one lagrangian in my proposal. |
|
|
|
2. how does using a Lagrangian allow a solution to be very efficiently verified as an optimal solution? Sounds like the only way to verify some solution is really gobally optimal is to redo all the computation that went into it, in which case it cannot serve as a proof-of-work.
Computing a Lagrangian for a given path is fast and straightforward. Finding the path that gives a local or global minimum is the hard part. Basically there would be a public database of known optimals for a whole bunch of Lagrangians. Whenever someone breaks the currently known record, he gets the point. |
|
|
|
I also want to be a pet. My cats have it made! They don't work or pay rent, they are well groomed and have free health care that is better than most humans. Take me overlords. I would love to sit in your cold metallic lap.
Whenever you play angry birds on your smartphone, or anything like that, that's basically what happens.  |
|
|
|
Not an article about bitcoin, but a mention of it by Palmer Luckey, creator of the Oculus rift, Virtual Reality Headset for gaming. « Interviewer: I never really “got” Second Life. Minecraft, I can wrap my head around quickly. But Second Life … Luckey: It’s very difficult to get into. There’s a steep learning curve. The last time I went into Second Life was to buy bitcoins from a crazy guy who was selling them below market value, but you had to go into Second Life to meet with him. » http://allthingsd.com/20130606/oculus-luckey-and-mitchell-whats-the-end-game-for-the-rift-qa-part-two/It's one of those still rare articles where I found a mention of bitcoin by pure chance (I was reading the article because I'm interested in the Oculus rift). |
|
|
|
I do not care about divisibilty as that is akin to inflation. Try to use your brain a little before writing silly things. If you decide to count your money in cents instead of dollars, does that make you one hundred times richer? |
|
|
|
|
Anyone knows how long does the verification process take? It's been a few days now and it is still "pending".
|
|
|
|
In months where BTC is volatile they write a piece about volatility and in months where it is stable they write a piece about stability. Round and round they go.
Exactly. Those people are hopeless. |
|
|
|
I think they can take all their pre-mined coins and their centralized infrastructure and piss off now.
Centralized, *closed source* infrastructure. Fixed That For You. What? The code source has not been released yet?! How long can you say you do something and do the opposite until people say you're a liar? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
