Re[5]: THE HARD MATH BEHIND BITCOIN'S GLOBAL WARMING PROBLEM :: Something smarter than us is going to emerge


node:	Re[5]: THE HARD MATH BEHIND BITCOIN'S GLOBAL WARMING PROBLEM
template:	4
parent:	Re[4]: THE HARD MATH BEHIND BITCOIN'S GLOBAL WARMING PROBLEM
owner:	kyberbubus
viewed by:
created:	18.12.2017 - 12:46:09

cwbe coordinatez:
101
63540
63590
5734320
8432532
8433068
8433069
8433071
8433074
8433248

ABSOLUT
KYBERIA

permissions
you:	r,
system:	public
net:	yes

princíp civilizácie (a aj prírody, konieckoncov) je v efektivite. nevyhrá ten, kto vyťaží najviac zdrojov, ale kto vytvorí čo najviac hodnoty z čo najmenej zdrojov.

×÷ßßß$ˇ~[☼◙ş→☻ü84ó♀ÇüŮń§►♫☺♀♂ć☺<\ˇ

0000010100063540000635900573432008432532084330680843306908433071084330740843324808433299

The SHA-256 algorithm is surprisingly simple, easy enough to do by hand. (The elliptic curve algorithm for signing Bitcoin transactions would be very painful to do by hand since it has lots of multiplication of 32-byte integers.) Doing one round of SHA-256 by hand took me 16 minutes, 45 seconds. At this rate, hashing a full Bitcoin block (128 rounds)[3] would take 1.49 days, for a hash rate of 0.67 hashes per day (although I would probably get faster with practice). In comparison, current Bitcoin mining hardware does several terahashes per second, about a quintillion times faster than my manual hashing. Needless to say, manual Bitcoin mining is not at all practical.[5]
A Reddit reader asked about my energy consumption. There's not much physical exertion, so assuming a resting metabolic rate of 1500kcal/day, manual hashing works out to almost 10 megajoules/hash. A typical energy consumption for mining hardware is 1000 megahashes/joule. So I'm less energy efficient by a factor of 10^16, or 10 quadrillion. The next question is the energy cost. A cheap source of food energy is donuts at $0.23 for 200 kcalories. Electricity here is $0.15/kilowatt-hour, which is cheaper by a factor of 6.7 - closer than I expected. Thus my energy cost per hash is about 67 quadrillion times that of mining hardware. It's clear I'm not going to make my fortune off manual mining, and I haven't even included the cost of all the paper and pencils I'll need.
http://www.righto.com/2014/09/mining-bitcoin-with-pencil-and-paper.html

0000010100063540000635900573432008432532084330680843306908433071084330740843324808433255

inspirobot?

000001010006354000063590057343200843253208433068084330690843307108433074084332480843325508433274

v prirodzenom výbere bol miliardy rokov tlak na takúto efektivitu využívania zdrojov, pretože zdrojov bolo vždy málo, ale potomstva musí byť čo najviac. to je jeden z dôvodov, pre ktorý inžinieri dodnes kopírujú živú prírodu. aj civilizácia ide dopredu vďaka efektivite, akékoľvek bezbrehé vyčerpávanie zdrojov bez rozmyslu obvykle prinesie pohromu.

×÷ßßß$ˇ~[☼◙ş→☻ü84ó♀ÇüŮń§►♫☺♀♂ć☺<\ˇ

00000101000635400006359005734320084325320843306808433069084330710843307408433248084332550843327408433279

tusim spravne ze narazas na poslednych 200+ rokov fossil-powered kapitalizmu?

0000010100063540000635900573432008432532084330680843306908433071084330740843324808433255084332740843327908433286

ľudstvo bolo schopné urobiť aj tuhšie enviro katastrofy v minulosti. akurát vzhľadom k tomu, že ľudí vtedy nebolo tak veľa, boli skôr lokálne. v týchto končinách viď napríklad masívne odlesňovanie za čias Rímskej ríše. .

×÷ßßß$ˇ~[☼◙ş→☻ü84ó♀ÇüŮń§►♫☺♀♂ć☺<\ˇ

0000010100063540000635900573432008432532084330680843306908433071084330740843324808433249

hodnoty? :)
no v konecnom dosledku, ked sa to agreguje, ten najefektivnejsi aj tak vyuzije najviac zdrojov lebo zaplni celu niku

000001010006354000063590057343200843253208433068084330690843307108433074084332480843324908433251

keby to tak bolo, už máme rozdrbanú zemeguľu na kompletku teraz a nie až o sto rokov, či?:)

×÷ßßß$ˇ~[☼◙ş→☻ü84ó♀ÇüŮń§►♫☺♀♂ć☺<\ˇ

00000101000635400006359005734320084325320843306808433069084330710843307408433248084332490843325108433258

Nepisal som nic o rychlosti zmien.

e: v jednej podmnozine temy kde sa to da uplatnit sa toto nazyva Jevonsov paradox.