Wasted Computations and Grid Computing

Pages: (1/5) > >>

Timo Y:

Here is an idea how Bitcoin could be improved:

In the current implementation, scarcity is created by setting up arbitrary computational problems whose sole purpose is to create scarcity. The computational problems are artificially created by the system, much like a fiat currency. There is no natural demand to solve those problems.

This is macroeconomically suboptimal because a lot of CPU power is being "wasted" instead of being put to good use (opportunity cost). It would be bad for the environment too, if BC were ever to become a world currency.

Why not use those CPU cycles to perform computations with real value? This could be done via some sort of grid computing infrastructure such as BOINC, except that it would be a marketplace instead of a volunteer grid.

For example:
A drug company wishing to model the structure of some protein could use Bitcoins to buy "computing credits". The computing credits can then be used to secure the right to define the data and algorithm of each computational chunk.  The CPUs of the BC users solve these chunks and send the results back to the drug company. As before, the BC user gets newly generated Bitcoins in return for computing each chunk. In addition, the user receives the Bitcoins paid by the drug company.

This would have the benefit of backing BC with something more tangible than just the collective faith in the project. It would also generate lots of extra demand for BC.

Any thoughts?

chaord:

I completely agree.  My main hesitation with BitCoin at present, from an market-anarchist perspective is that BC lacks intrinsic value.  By this I mean simply that BC is a medium of exchange by design and by declaration, not through natural market selection.  Taking gold as an example, the market had already chosen and accepted gold as a medium of exchange long before governments got involved and "endorsed" it.

What I'm wondering is if the BC concept would be better applied to a community like I2P?  In my opinion, what I2P is missing is an underlying agreeable cryptocurrency which it's nodes can earn by keeping the network online, and it's members can use as a form of payment.  If this were the case, BC would probably start having some intrinsic value within the I2P community which creates a positive feedback loop for I2P: more nodes pop up, stronger network, etc.  And next thing you know, a completely encrypted and anonymous internet can emerge in parallel to the existing one.  I think this would be incredible, especially being able to jump between the two.

What do you guys think? I really don't know much about I2P, but I wonder if something like this is feasible?  It would be great to see non-geek types start migrating towards a true privacy protected internet, and perhaps the ability to earn something of value for keeping the network up would motivate them?

dwdollar:

Quote from: WillyWonka on July 06, 2010, 02:29:00 AM
--
I completely agree.  My main hesitation with BitCoin at present, from an market-anarchist perspective is that BC lacks intrinsic value.  By this I mean simply that BC is a medium of exchange by design and by declaration, not through natural market selection.  Taking gold as an example, the market had already chosen and accepted gold as a medium of exchange long before governments got involved and "endorsed" it.

What I'm wondering is if the BC concept would be better applied to a community like I2P?  In my opinion, what I2P is missing is an underlying agreeable cryptocurrency which it's nodes can earn by keeping the network online, and it's members can use as a form of payment.  If this were the case, BC would probably start having some intrinsic value within the I2P community which creates a positive feedback loop for I2P: more nodes pop up, stronger network, etc.  And next thing you know, a completely encrypted and anonymous internet can emerge in parallel to the existing one.  I think this would be incredible, especially being able to jump between the two.

What do you guys think? I really don't know much about I2P, but I wonder if something like this is feasible?  It would be great to see non-geek types start migrating towards a true privacy protected internet, and perhaps the ability to earn something of value for keeping the network up would motivate them?

--

Nothing is stopping the I2P community from adopting it right now.  It'd be great if they did.

I'm not a believer of intrinsic value though.  Not even for gold.

Anonymous:

There is nothing stopping you from creating such a system.That to me is the intrinsic value of Bitcoins.You cant send actual gold over the internet and it is labour intensive to dig it out of the ground.Bitcoin could be the virtual equal of gold because it fits the virtual world.Gold is physical and is perfect for the physical market.For the virtual market you need something else.The market always decides what the perfect method of exchange is.What we have to do is make it incredibly easy to use virtual currency while maintaining is security.

Governments and criminals can easily seize your gold .

Bitcoin can exist in the cloud,gold can only exist in the material world.

llama:

AFAIK, there are no "useful" computational problems that have the properties necessary to be used as a proof-of-work. 

The hash function is used because it is irreversible, easily checkable, small in size, and probably some other things I'm forgetting.  Even if you could, for example, encode the transactions as a polypeptide (chain of amino acids), and then made folding the polypeptide into a protein the proof-of-work, such a proof-of-work could not be checked without redoing the entire computation.

Even if you could come up with a suitable problem, due to the economics of BC you would never actually generate any additional value by using a "useful" problem.

Pages: (1/5) > >>