Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Ok, lets do this on a GPU..... I have found through experience that theoretical gains on the GPU often do not pan out as you expect. So I need to see an implementation.
Your bounty only called for showing it is NO BETTER than Scrypt. I already did. I don't have to prove it is much faster on the CPU (but it will also be, yet that is irrelevant to how you stated your bounty).
If you choose to blissfully ignore what has been revealed to you, then so be it. I love it if you go down the wrong road. Please do. Worth much more to me than the $5000.
I agree,
the price was 12 PTS yesterday, this is a big drop.
It was actually a major price hike considering the cost of acquiring PTS and their value to those who believe in what we are doing enough to buy a Keyhotee ID.
I would argue that "price hike" based on current exchange rates is irrelevent. If you were selling a good that was resellable it might be a valid concern, but given that you expect the value of PTS to go up over time (I assume) it doesn't make sense for this to be price sensitive.
You should not change the price until exchanges exist, but it would be much better if you didnt change the price at all except to lower it. You will get more people willing to spend 25 PTS if they feel like they're getting a value from you (because it's cheaper than the current BTC exchange), you lose nothing and over time you'll probably gain more value from the PTS than BTC because PTS has more potential for exponential appreciation.
I think you should set the minimums at .25btc or 25 PTS and keep it there until it's flatly untenable.
Your original bounty didn't ask for an implementation. And $5000 doesn't buy enough time from me.
It is up to you how far you want to go down the wrong road.
There is no way to make CPU-only and fast verification. I realized that recently in analysis and research. I realize this is big problem for your coin design.
From bitcointalk.org thread, link=topic=313479.msg3363346#msg3363346 date=1382116292Quote from: bytemasterIf you are able to convince me this proof-of-work is no better than Scrypt then you will win the 30 btc bounty.
Given my immediately prior post, I hereby claim the 30 BTC bounty.
The point of Scrypt was to make parallel operation difficult and its primary weakness is that validation time suffers as you scale it.
If you don't require that the first match in the sequence of generated pseudo-random numbers, then my upthread described parallelism attack works to allow GPUs to blow away CPUs, assuming the pseudo-random sequence can be generated much faster than the random memory latency bound on the CPU so the GPU can try 100s of values from the same pseudo-random sequence in parallel to hide the memory latency.
If you do require it, then you lose the fast validation time.
Do you get it now or you going to continue to ignore me?
To clarify, the 50% chance for at least 1 collision for 23 people in your example is with doing n^2 operations, but when you're hashing you check each one against the ones you already have saved each time you add it to the hash table. You're not doing all n^2 operations each time since you've already compared the previous hashes to each other. You're just going n comparisons each time to see if the new hash matches. There's a disconnect between what you describe in your graphs and the actual algorithm. That 50% chance would be after 23 hashes you'd find AT LEAST 1 collision, but miners want to find MULTIPLE collisions which changes the whole scaling.
I like the core idea of using the bday hash to force high memory usage. I think you're idea of saturating the memory bandwidth has promise. I think that with the right parameters you could design mining that would have a very low improvement (perhaps none without the scale of ATI behind it) going to ASICs over GPUs due to GPU optimization of parallel operations and memory bandwidth. You could give CPUs a fighting chance as well since they can leverage high amounts of memory to make up for less raw hashes/memory bandwidth.
Your algorithm as it is though does not scale the way you think it does.
Nathaniel
Nice, good to know this.
I agree,
the price was 12 PTS yesterday, this is a big drop.
People may see the rate as an official exchange rate. It might be bad for ProtoShares exchange and further BitShares exchange.
Though anyone who believes in what we are doing would never sell their 100 PTS for $50 so I don't think this will affect things too much.
Will it be based on {cg,bfg}miner or it will be something very custom?
