Bitcoin Forum
May 08, 2024, 09:38:48 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Why not solve scientific problems  (Read 562 times)
cclambie (OP)
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 5
Merit: 0



View Profile WWW
May 01, 2013, 05:28:31 AM
 #1

Hi,
So my understanding of BitCoin is it actually just solves seemingly random problems.
Wouldn't it be better to solve problems, process and analysis parts of the universe for www.theskynet.org or similar?
Cure cancer?
It is all dependant on huge amounts of computing power.  Seems like BitCoin is a good place to get it?

Please explain.
1715204328
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715204328

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715204328
Reply with quote  #2

1715204328
Report to moderator
1715204328
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715204328

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715204328
Reply with quote  #2

1715204328
Report to moderator
1715204328
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715204328

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715204328
Reply with quote  #2

1715204328
Report to moderator
The Bitcoin network protocol was designed to be extremely flexible. It can be used to create timed transactions, escrow transactions, multi-signature transactions, etc. The current features of the client only hint at what will be possible in the future.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1715204328
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715204328

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715204328
Reply with quote  #2

1715204328
Report to moderator
casascius
Mike Caldwell
VIP
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 1136


The Casascius 1oz 10BTC Silver Round (w/ Gold B)


View Profile WWW
May 01, 2013, 05:29:56 AM
 #2

Hi,
So my understanding of BitCoin is it actually just solves seemingly random problems.
Wouldn't it be better to solve problems, process and analysis parts of the universe for www.theskynet.org or similar?
Cure cancer?
It is all dependant on huge amounts of computing power.  Seems like BitCoin is a good place to get it?

Please explain.

Bringing an unprecedented stateless nonpolitical currency to the world IS solving a world problem.  A HUGE world problem.  Much more worth solving than having a remote chance of finding alien communication in some random noise.  Mining is not just random busywork, there is a purpose.

Bitcoin is a ledger.  The purpose of mining is to quantify the world consensus for any given revision of the ledger so that nodes on the peer-to-peer network can reliably assess a level of confidence as to whether any given transaction record is in fact agreed upon by the rest of the world.

Companies claiming they got hacked and lost your coins sounds like fraud so perfect it could be called fashionable.  I never believe them.  If I ever experience the misfortune of a real intrusion, I declare I have been honest about the way I have managed the keys in Casascius Coins.  I maintain no ability to recover or reproduce the keys, not even under limitless duress or total intrusion.  Remember that trusting strangers with your coins without any recourse is, as a matter of principle, not a best practice.  Don't keep coins online. Use paper or hardware wallets instead.
spoorancher
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 30
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 01, 2013, 06:11:10 AM
 #3

There's a very small set of problems which are difficult to solve but easily verifiable. This is necessary to prevent cheating. I think there would be much more cheating in the distributed computing projects if there were $$$ at stake. However, I think your idea is on the right track. There are plenty of distributed computing projects out there which are more practically useful than, say, SETI. If there is a way to verify proof of work for something like protein folding in a decentralized way, I'm sure there's a niche for a "socially conscious" crypto-currency.
tripzero
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 01, 2013, 06:14:22 AM
 #4

I was thinking this exact same thing.  A decentralized currency solves a lot of problems, but if it was based upon productive capacity rather than busy-work, it'd be more intrinsic IMHO.
tony_357
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 33
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 01, 2013, 06:25:06 AM
 #5

Doesn't this argument result in the end of all non-practical research?

Several hundred years ago, when people were looking up at the stars with a telescope, and plotting the movements of the stars and the planets - this had no practical use then.  So what if Mars seems to move differently than the other "wanderers" (which turns out to be planets).

So, if this argument was followed back then, we would not have discovered that the earth moves around the sun, learned about gravity, developed a branch of mathematics called Fourier Analysis (which is what is used in many other fields of physics, engineering, and communications).

There are many nice things which come from being able to solve difficult problems.

Somebody once said, the world only needed maybe 6 computers, or that there was no need for more than 640K of memory in a computer?
cclambie (OP)
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 5
Merit: 0



View Profile WWW
May 01, 2013, 06:29:32 AM
 #6

Bringing an unprecedented stateless nonpolitical currency to the world IS solving a world problem.  A HUGE world problem.  Much more worth solving than having a remote chance of finding alien communication in some random noise.  Mining is not just random busywork, there is a purpose.

Bitcoin is a ledger.  The purpose of mining is to quantify the world consensus for any given revision of the ledger so that nodes on the peer-to-peer network can reliably assess a level of confidence as to whether any given transaction record is in fact agreed upon by the rest of the world.
Thanks this is very true I stand corrected.

As tony_357 suggests, who knows what will come of this type of research.
Doesn't this argument result in the end of all non-practical research?

Several hundred years ago, when people were looking up at the stars with a telescope, and plotting the movements of the stars and the planets - this had no practical use then.  So what if Mars seems to move differently than the other "wanderers" (which turns out to be planets).

So, if this argument was followed back then, we would not have discovered that the earth moves around the sun, learned about gravity, developed a branch of mathematics called Fourier Analysis (which is what is used in many other fields of physics, engineering, and communications).

There are many nice things which come from being able to solve difficult problems.

Somebody once said, the world only needed maybe 6 computers, or that there was no need for more than 640K of memory in a computer?
syndtr
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 7
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 01, 2013, 06:36:10 AM
 #7

How about replacing the PoW from solving hash to solving for example Folding@Home work units instead. But it would need a central coordinator I think, which is a major cons.
EvilMadHatter05
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 9
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 01, 2013, 09:27:01 AM
 #8

How about replacing the PoW from solving hash to solving for example Folding@Home work units instead. But it would need a central coordinator I think, which is a major cons.

While I think that would be helpful to science, I'm pretty sure it would destroy bitcoin as a currency seeing how like your example Folding@Home work units are  do not have a minimum difficulty but greatly varied by my understanding. Which in turn would mean that some people would get coins very very fast while other would get them much slower. On the other hand since bitcoin is pretty much hash breaking to get data (the transactions in said coin) it might be plausible to switch it to something that improves encryption and decryption. I maybe wrong though.
Saint!
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 46
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 01, 2013, 10:56:27 AM
 #9


There are many programs that already do solve those problems. But you can't run those and a miner at the same time.

Although the new ASICs are designed only to solve the bitcoin SHA256 hash so wont be much use for anything else.
incloudibly
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 143
Merit: 100


The Crypto Hosting Provider


View Profile WWW
May 01, 2013, 11:42:37 AM
 #10

There are lots of scientific distributed computing networks that you can participate in.

COIN.HOST- Dedciated Servers, VPS and Crypto VPN. Proudly served from Switzerland with privacy in mind.
mmeijeri
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714
Merit: 500

Martijn Meijering


View Profile
May 01, 2013, 11:49:24 AM
 #11

So my understanding of BitCoin is it actually just solves seemingly random problems.

It's not random. The term mining is misleading, it is really closer to auditing, but it's just that there's a built-in finite duration, ever-decreasing reward for this auditing activity. What miners do is to solve a specific mathematical problem that's directly derived from the block of transaction they've audited. It's a bit like trying to solve a 50 digit combination lock by brute force, but the number of digits you have get correct is adjusted automatically every two weeks or so in such a way that a miner discovers an acceptable combination roughly once every ten minutes.

ROI is not a verb, the term you're looking for is 'to break even'.
zerodrama
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364
Merit: 250


View Profile
May 01, 2013, 12:07:52 PM
 #12

Hi,
So my understanding of BitCoin is it actually just solves seemingly random problems.
Wouldn't it be better to solve problems, process and analysis parts of the universe for www.theskynet.org or similar?
Cure cancer?
It is all dependant on huge amounts of computing power.  Seems like BitCoin is a good place to get it?

Please explain.

I love this question. It's the classic "What are you doing? Writing. Well since you're not doing anything, can you mow the lawn, clean out the garage, and fix the faucet?".

Canada already cured cancer, but lo and behold, no profits in that.

We are solving a problem, you're just not seeing the forest for the trees. By the same token, why burn electricity to cure cancer instead of doing something worthwhile like getting an education in medicine and then being the lucky one to invent something which cures cancer. Western abuse of Occam's razor simplicity at its worst.

You're trying to evaluate solutions from a rhetorical and philosophical stance. Doesn't work. EVER.

Bitcoin is a solution. Think of it this way, why play with a bunch of wires and build the electric grid when you can do something that solves problems like plowing the field. Oh wait, electricity = farm machinery.

You are simply looking at it from a materialist progressive point of view. Supercomputer networks are networks controlled by a central brain. Bitcoin is a network of brains.

The real question is not "Why not solve problems instead of Bitcoin?", it's "How can Bitcoin type networks solve problems?"

Sorry, I just get tired of the Holy Purpose Model. Especially, since the Holy Purpose Model is both socially and structurally inefficient and constipated.

EASY CALCULATION FOR TRADES: 1 Million is 1x10e6. 1 Satoshi is 1x10e-8. 1 M sat is 1x10e-2. 100 M sat is 1. If 1 herpcoin = 100 derptoshi then
1 M herpcoin @ 001 derptoshi = 0.01 derpcoin, 1 M herpcoin @ 100 derptoshi = 1.00 derpcoin
Post Scarcity Economics thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3773185
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!