Making PoW usefull

[fenghush]

. . .

No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

No one said those activities aren’t any less unnecessary than Bitcoin mining.

Thanks to mining gold we're able to communicate at this moment, there's tons of gold across all internet capable devices.

[username18333]

. . .

No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

No one said those activities aren’t any less unnecessary than Bitcoin mining.

Thanks to mining gold we're able to communicate at this moment, there's tons of gold across all internet capable devices.

(Red colorization mine.)

However, that is not “[t]hanks to” (fenghush) the storage of gold bullion.

[ArticMine]

Here is a guy who is using the power of bitcoin mining to benefit the planet:



I'm going to buy some of his bitcoins right now, how about you give him your money too!

Bitcoin 1.0 YAY!!!

Very interesting. The trouble is there is no way he can compete with someone using obsolete XBT mining equipment for space heating, where the effective cost of electricity becomes negative, regardless of the price of electricity.

Making POW useful requires nothing more a than changing the mindset. There are many situations where the heat produced has more value than the electricity consumed. Ever used electricity to produce heat? If the objective is to use electricity to produce heat, then POW mining of crypto currency becomes simply a way to reduce costs.

[username18333]

. . .

Making POW useful requires nothing more a than changing the mindset. There are many situations where the heat produced has more value than the electricity consumed. Ever used electricity to produce heat? If the objective is to use electricity to produce heat, then POW mining of crypto currency becomes simply a way to reduce costs.

Electric heating elements are, however, substantially more economical.

[ArticMine]

. . .

Making POW useful requires nothing more a than changing the mindset. There are many situations where the heat produced has more value than the electricity consumed. Ever used electricity to produce heat? If the objective is to use electricity to produce heat, then POW mining of crypto currency becomes simply a way to reduce costs.

Electric heating elements are, however, substantially more economical.

How? I am talking about obsolete mining equipment, which in theory has zero value, particularly if one is talking about ASICS.

[username18333]

. . .

Making POW useful requires nothing more a than changing the mindset. There are many situations where the heat produced has more value than the electricity consumed. Ever used electricity to produce heat? If the objective is to use electricity to produce heat, then POW mining of crypto currency becomes simply a way to reduce costs.

Electric heating elements are, however, substantially more economical.

How? I am talking about obsolete mining equipment, which in theory has zero value, particularly if one is talking about ASICS.

I didn't realize you were so specifically referring to obsolete Bitcoin mining equipment. Regardless, I still contend that electricity, if it is to be utilized in heating, is more efficiently made to produce heat with equipment designed specifically for the task.

[ArticMine]

. . .

Making POW useful requires nothing more a than changing the mindset. There are many situations where the heat produced has more value than the electricity consumed. Ever used electricity to produce heat? If the objective is to use electricity to produce heat, then POW mining of crypto currency becomes simply a way to reduce costs.

Electric heating elements are, however, substantially more economical.

How? I am talking about obsolete mining equipment, which in theory has zero value, particularly if one is talking about ASICS.

I didn't realize you were so specifically referring to obsolete Bitcoin mining equipment. Regardless, I still contend that electricity, if it is to be utilized in heating, is more efficiently made to produce heat with equipment designed specifically for the task.

Not true. Electric heating basically dissipates heat in a resistor and then in many cases has fans to distribute the heat. This is no different from electronic equipment, only that the resistor is replaced by the various integrated circuits. In both cases if one puts in 500 watts of electricity in one gets 500 watts of heat out. This is just the first law of thermodynamics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_law_of_thermodynamics.

[username18333]

. . .

I didn't realize you were so specifically referring to obsolete Bitcoin mining equipment. Regardless, I still contend that electricity, if it is to be utilized in heating, is more efficiently made to produce heat with equipment designed specifically for the task.

Not true. Electric heating basically dissipates heat in a resistor and then in many cases has fans to distribute the heat. This is no different from electronic equipment, only that the resistor is replaced by the various integrated circuits. In both cases if one puts in 500 watts of electricity in one gets 500 watts of heat out. This is just the first law of thermodynamics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_law_of_thermodynamics.

(Red colorization mine.)

Your statement does not account for electricity lost to other forms of energy.

[ArticMine]

. . .

I didn't realize you were so specifically referring to obsolete Bitcoin mining equipment. Regardless, I still contend that electricity, if it is to be utilized in heating, is more efficiently made to produce heat with equipment designed specifically for the task.

Not true. Electric heating basically dissipates heat in a resistor and then in many cases has fans to distribute the heat. This is no different from electronic equipment, only that the resistor is replaced by the various integrated circuits. In both cases if one puts in 500 watts of electricity in one gets 500 watts of heat out. This is just the first law of thermodynamics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_law_of_thermodynamics.

(Red colorization mine.)

Your statement does not account for electricity lost to other forms of energy.

What other forms of energy?  Please specify.

Edit: Those who wish to bet against the laws of Physics or the laws of Mathematics with their money are of course free to do so. I will pass and stick to POW coins.

[username18333]

. . .

I didn't realize you were so specifically referring to obsolete Bitcoin mining equipment. Regardless, I still contend that electricity, if it is to be utilized in heating, is more efficiently made to produce heat with equipment designed specifically for the task.

Not true. Electric heating basically dissipates heat in a resistor and then in many cases has fans to distribute the heat. This is no different from electronic equipment, only that the resistor is replaced by the various integrated circuits. In both cases if one puts in 500 watts of electricity in one gets 500 watts of heat out. This is just the first law of thermodynamics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_law_of_thermodynamics.

(Red colorization mine.)

Your statement does not account for electricity lost to other forms of energy.

What other forms of energy?  Please specify.

Edit: Those who wish to bet against the laws of Physics or the laws of Mathematics with their money are of course free to do so. I will pass and stick to POW coins.

For one, the kinetic energy of the cooling fans. For another, the radiant energy of the LEDs of the circuit boards.

[ArticMine]

. . .

I didn't realize you were so specifically referring to obsolete Bitcoin mining equipment. Regardless, I still contend that electricity, if it is to be utilized in heating, is more efficiently made to produce heat with equipment designed specifically for the task.

Not true. Electric heating basically dissipates heat in a resistor and then in many cases has fans to distribute the heat. This is no different from electronic equipment, only that the resistor is replaced by the various integrated circuits. In both cases if one puts in 500 watts of electricity in one gets 500 watts of heat out. This is just the first law of thermodynamics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_law_of_thermodynamics.

(Red colorization mine.)

Your statement does not account for electricity lost to other forms of energy.

What other forms of energy?  Please specify.

Edit: Those who wish to bet against the laws of Physics or the laws of Mathematics with their money are of course free to do so. I will pass and stick to POW coins.

For one, the kinetic energy of the cooling fans. For another, the radiant energy of the LEDs of the circuit boards.

Nope. The kinetic energy of the cooling fans becomes heat through friction. What happens to a cooling fan when you turn of the power it slows down and stops because of friction. As for the light emitted by LED on a circuit board it gets absorbed by the case and turned into heat.

Edit: This is starting to remind me of debates over Angle Trisection using a strait edge and a compass. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angle_trisection

[username18333]

. . .

I didn't realize you were so specifically referring to obsolete Bitcoin mining equipment. Regardless, I still contend that electricity, if it is to be utilized in heating, is more efficiently made to produce heat with equipment designed specifically for the task.

Not true. Electric heating basically dissipates heat in a resistor and then in many cases has fans to distribute the heat. This is no different from electronic equipment, only that the resistor is replaced by the various integrated circuits. In both cases if one puts in 500 watts of electricity in one gets 500 watts of heat out. This is just the first law of thermodynamics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_law_of_thermodynamics.

(Red colorization mine.)

Your statement does not account for electricity lost to other forms of energy.

What other forms of energy?  Please specify.

Edit: Those who wish to bet against the laws of Physics or the laws of Mathematics with their money are of course free to do so. I will pass and stick to POW coins.

For one, the kinetic energy of the cooling fans. For another, the radiant energy of the LEDs of the circuit boards.

Nope. The kinetic energy of the cooling fans becomes heat through friction. What happens to a cooling fan when you turn of the power it slows down and stops because of friction. As for the light emitted by LED on a circuit board it gets absorbed by the case and turned into heat.

Edit: This is starting to remind me of debates over Angle Trisection using a strait edge and a compass. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angle_trisection

That assumes the devices are enclosed. If the devices are open and light can escape the space, then its energy will be lost. As well, the space being an thermodynamically open system, if the heating elements should be spread about, the diffusion of their heat into the environment beyond the space is, effectively, assisted. Were one to move them closer together, they would, at certain proximities, cease to function.

[ArticMine]

. . .

I didn't realize you were so specifically referring to obsolete Bitcoin mining equipment. Regardless, I still contend that electricity, if it is to be utilized in heating, is more efficiently made to produce heat with equipment designed specifically for the task.

Not true. Electric heating basically dissipates heat in a resistor and then in many cases has fans to distribute the heat. This is no different from electronic equipment, only that the resistor is replaced by the various integrated circuits. In both cases if one puts in 500 watts of electricity in one gets 500 watts of heat out. This is just the first law of thermodynamics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_law_of_thermodynamics.

(Red colorization mine.)

Your statement does not account for electricity lost to other forms of energy.

What other forms of energy?  Please specify.

Edit: Those who wish to bet against the laws of Physics or the laws of Mathematics with their money are of course free to do so. I will pass and stick to POW coins.

For one, the kinetic energy of the cooling fans. For another, the radiant energy of the LEDs of the circuit boards.

Nope. The kinetic energy of the cooling fans becomes heat through friction. What happens to a cooling fan when you turn of the power it slows down and stops because of friction. As for the light emitted by LED on a circuit board it gets absorbed by the case and turned into heat.

Edit: This is starting to remind me of debates over Angle Trisection using a strait edge and a compass. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angle_trisection

That assumes the devices are enclosed. If the devices are open and light can escape the space, then its energy will be lost.

I was waiting for this one. The practical advantage here is with the mining equipment.  A XBT mining ASIC will produce less light that can escape, via say a window with the curtains open, than say a radiant space heater that glows red. So again no.

[ArticMine]

...  As well, the space being, an thermodynamically open system, if the heating elements should be spread about, the diffusion of their heat into the environment beyond the space is, effectively, assisted. Were one to move them closer together, they would, at certain proximities, cease to function.

Yes this is very true. This brings me to my next point. Using electricity for space heating by its very nature only makes sense if the heat is needed for a decentralized application. The heat at the power station is in many cases just waste heat. It is here where space heating creates a further advantage for POW that was not taken into account even by Satoshi Nakamoto in https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf or by Adam Back in http://www.hashcash.org/papers/hashcash.pdf. The assumption that is made in these papers is that the marginal cost of POW is the same for the honest nodes as for an attacker (dishonest node). Space heating skews this further in favour of the honest nodes because the value of the heat is so much higher for the decentralized (honest nodes) than for the centralized (dishonest node). In short the honest nodes may end up having a negative marginal POW cost while a dishonest attacking node still has a positive marginal POW cost.

Making POW "useful" only makes sense only if the "useful" application requires decentralization in order to have value.

[username18333]

...  As well, the space being, an thermodynamically open system, if the heating elements should be spread about, the diffusion of their heat into the environment beyond the space is, effectively, assisted. Were one to move them closer together, they would, at certain proximities, cease to function.

Yes this is very true. This brings me to my next point. Using electricity for space heating by its very nature only makes sense if the heat is needed for a decentralized application. The heat at the power station is in many cases just waste heat. It is here where space heating creates a further advantage for POW that was not taken into account even by Satoshi Nakamoto in https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf or by Adam Back in http://www.hashcash.org/papers/hashcash.pdf. The assumption that is made in these papers is that the marginal cost of POW is the same for the honest nodes as for an attacker (dishonest node). Space heating skews this further in favour of the honest nodes because the value of the heat is so much higher for the decentralized (honest nodes) than for the centralized (dishonest node). In short the honest nodes may end up having a negative marginal POW cost while a dishonest attacking node still has a positive marginal POW cost.

Making POW "useful" only makes sense only if the "useful" application requires decentralization in order to have value. .

However, the economic merits of your proposition do not extend to those that do not already have regular access to a Bitcoin ASIC.

[ArticMine]

...  As well, the space being, an thermodynamically open system, if the heating elements should be spread about, the diffusion of their heat into the environment beyond the space is, effectively, assisted. Were one to move them closer together, they would, at certain proximities, cease to function.

Yes this is very true. This brings me to my next point. Using electricity for space heating by its very nature only makes sense if the heat is needed for a decentralized application. The heat at the power station is in many cases just waste heat. It is here where space heating creates a further advantage for POW that was not taken into account even by Satoshi Nakamoto in https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf or by Adam Back in http://www.hashcash.org/papers/hashcash.pdf. The assumption that is made in these papers is that the marginal cost of POW is the same for the honest nodes as for an attacker (dishonest node). Space heating skews this further in favour of the honest nodes because the value of the heat is so much higher for the decentralized (honest nodes) than for the centralized (dishonest node). In short the honest nodes may end up having a negative marginal POW cost while a dishonest attacking node still has a positive marginal POW cost.

Making POW "useful" only makes sense only if the "useful" application requires decentralization in order to have value. .

However, the economic merits of your proposition do not extend to those that do not already have regular access to a Bitcoin ASIC.

Not necessarily. They work just as well for someone say mining Monero (XMR) using spare CPU / GPU cycles on a PC. The first law of thermodynamics does not change because one is mining XBT on an ASIC, XMR on a PC or some other POW alt-coin.

Edit: It could work just as well with say Freicoin. http://freico.in/ Any loss due to demurrage would be more than compensated by the savings in heating costs.

[username18333]

...  As well, the space being, an thermodynamically open system, if the heating elements should be spread about, the diffusion of their heat into the environment beyond the space is, effectively, assisted. Were one to move them closer together, they would, at certain proximities, cease to function.

Yes this is very true. This brings me to my next point. Using electricity for space heating by its very nature only makes sense if the heat is needed for a decentralized application. The heat at the power station is in many cases just waste heat. It is here where space heating creates a further advantage for POW that was not taken into account even by Satoshi Nakamoto in https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf or by Adam Back in http://www.hashcash.org/papers/hashcash.pdf. The assumption that is made in these papers is that the marginal cost of POW is the same for the honest nodes as for an attacker (dishonest node). Space heating skews this further in favour of the honest nodes because the value of the heat is so much higher for the decentralized (honest nodes) than for the centralized (dishonest node). In short the honest nodes may end up having a negative marginal POW cost while a dishonest attacking node still has a positive marginal POW cost.

Making POW "useful" only makes sense only if the "useful" application requires decentralization in order to have value. .

However, the economic merits of your proposition do not extend to those that do not already have regular access to a Bitcoin ASIC.

Not necessarily. They work just as well for someone say mining Monero (XMR) using spare CPU / GPU cycles on a PC. The first law of thermodynamics does not change because one is mining XBT on an ASIC, XMR on a PC or some other POW alt-coin.

That would beget shorter lifespans for one's electronics. As well, someone in that position would likely have access to a more efficient central heating system.

[ArticMine]

...
That would beget shorter lifespans for one's electronics. As well, someone in that position would likely have access to a more efficient central heating system.

Most electronics are not thrown out because they fail. They are thrown out because of planned obsolescence driven by propriety software and DRM. E-waste is one of the fastest growing environmental problems today. As for a "more efficient central heating system" what do you have in mind? We are going in circles here.

[username18333]

. . .

That would beget shorter lifespans for one’s electronics. As well, someone in that position would likely have access to a more efficient central heating system.

Most electronics are not thrown out because they fail. They are thrown out because of planned obsolescence driven by propriety software and DRM. E-waste is one of the fastest growing environmental problems today. As for a "more efficient central heating system" what do you have in mind? We are going in circles here.

PoW is as useful as it is necessary. When PoW seems to be useless the question one should ask is, “Is it [the PoW schema] necessary?” The necessity of PoW, I have found, is directly proportionate to that of its coin. In light of this and the discussion here, it would follow that Bitcoin might not be necessary and that, because of that, its PoW is widely deemed unnecessary and, thus, “useless.”

[ArticMine]

...

PoW is as useful as it is necessary. When PoW seems to be useless the question one should ask is, "Is it [the PoW schema] necessary?" The necessity of PoW, I have found, is directly proportionate to that of its coin. In light of this and the discussion here, it would follow that Bitcoin might not be necessary and that, because of that, its PoW is widely deemed unnecessary and, thus, "useless."

... and the proposal is to replace POW with?