I've seen some products where the generic explicitly states "not affiliated with the maker of X". Dunno if they're telling the truth.
What are your thoughts on BitCoin?
- Thread starter aimeeandbeatles
- Start date
I've seen some products where the generic explicitly states "not affiliated with the maker of X". Dunno if they're telling the truth.
Moderator Action: I believe that the topic for this thread is Bitcoin. Let's get back to the main topic please.
Nature has an article on this today:
Within a decade, quantum computers will be able to break a blockchain’s cryptographic codes. Here we highlight how quantum technology makes blockchains vulnerable — and how it could render them more secure.
Blockchain security relies on ‘one-way’ mathematical functions. These are straightforward to run on a conventional computer and difficult to calculate in reverse. For example, multiplying two large prime numbers is easy, but finding the prime factors of a given product is hard — it can take a conventional computer many years to solve.
Yet, within ten years, quantum computers will be able to calculate the one-way functions, including blockchains, that are used to secure the Internet and financial transactions. Widely deployed one-way encryption will instantly become obsolete.
Quantum computers exploit physical effects, such as superpositions of states and entanglement, to perform computational tasks. They are currently much less powerful than conventional computers, but will soon be able to outperform them on certain tasks. One such example is breaking security protocols that are based on cryptographic algorithms, as mathematician Peter Shor pointed out in 1994 [3]. A blockchain is particularly at risk from this because one-way functions are its sole line of defence — a user’s only protection is their digital signature, whereas bank clients are protected by plastic cards, security questions, identity checks and human cashiers.
Cracking of digital signatures is therefore the most imminent threat. A wrongdoer equipped with a quantum computer could use Shor’s algorithm to forge any digital signature, impersonate that user and appropriate their digital assets. Most specialists think that this feat would require a universal quantum computer (one capable of performing a wide variety of calculations), which is more than a decade away. Yet some researchers suggest that this could happen sooner, using emerging quantum computational devices that have more limited capabilities, such as those being developed by the computing firms D-Wave, Google and others.
Blockchain security relies on ‘one-way’ mathematical functions. These are straightforward to run on a conventional computer and difficult to calculate in reverse. For example, multiplying two large prime numbers is easy, but finding the prime factors of a given product is hard — it can take a conventional computer many years to solve.
Yet, within ten years, quantum computers will be able to calculate the one-way functions, including blockchains, that are used to secure the Internet and financial transactions. Widely deployed one-way encryption will instantly become obsolete.
Quantum computers exploit physical effects, such as superpositions of states and entanglement, to perform computational tasks. They are currently much less powerful than conventional computers, but will soon be able to outperform them on certain tasks. One such example is breaking security protocols that are based on cryptographic algorithms, as mathematician Peter Shor pointed out in 1994 [3]. A blockchain is particularly at risk from this because one-way functions are its sole line of defence — a user’s only protection is their digital signature, whereas bank clients are protected by plastic cards, security questions, identity checks and human cashiers.
Cracking of digital signatures is therefore the most imminent threat. A wrongdoer equipped with a quantum computer could use Shor’s algorithm to forge any digital signature, impersonate that user and appropriate their digital assets. Most specialists think that this feat would require a universal quantum computer (one capable of performing a wide variety of calculations), which is more than a decade away. Yet some researchers suggest that this could happen sooner, using emerging quantum computational devices that have more limited capabilities, such as those being developed by the computing firms D-Wave, Google and others.
There are solutions suggested, but they involve either using quantum cryptography to replace classical digital signatures, which seem impossible to retrofit to say bitcoin so would require a whole new currency, or using quantum technology for communicating (quantum internet) which is a whole new infrastructure that may or may not be technically feasible in the timescale of quantum computers becoming available.
Last edited:
EnglishEdward
Deity
I think that bitcoin is an obscure form of the pyramid scam.
They do share features with pyramid schemes, such as advanage to those who got in early, and I think that the probability of losing your money tends to 1 as the time you hold them tends to infinity. However they have some features that distinguish them such that they are something different. They do provide some real world utility, in that there are things you can do with cryptocurrency that you cannot do any other way. These things are generally things the state does not want you to do, and they include things that are pretty uncontroversially negative such as ransomware and hit men, it also includes funding opportunities for those fighting oppressive regimes. Also there are no secrets about how it works, anyone is free to examine the maths, code and blockchain to make their decision.
I have an idea that I would like critiqued:
I want to make an electric heater that makes monero.
I want to make an electric heater that makes monero.
- At home I have shared central heating, and it is sometimes not enough and needs extra. This means using an electric heater.
- They are decommissioning some servers at work, including my old research server. This is fairly powerful, 64 cores, 1/2 TB memory, considerable on chip cache. It was about 8 grand about 6 years ago I think. I reckon they may give it to me if I ask.
Last edited:
I like it! Especially if it's truly used as heat. The expensive part of the setup is something you'd be getting for free, plus your time (but it's probably time well-spent). You can always sell the servers on your local buy & sell, too. Actually, this might be more money for you, overall.
Yes, by mining you're reducing the benefit to everyone else mining for profit
Yes, by mining you're reducing the benefit to everyone else mining for profit
Lexicus
Deity
Is this supposed to say 1994, with 3 being a citation?
Yes and now fixed, thanks for letting me know.
amadeus
Bishop of Bio-Dome
I never bought any, nor into the hype. The only utility I see in it is where central banks are so incompetent and inflationary that a secondary means of transaction becomes necessary. Fortunately, most countries do not experience Venezuela-like hyperinflation.
Other than that, it’s just a speculative investment that people buy into because they want to change it back to real money at some point in the future after its $ value has increased.
Other than that, it’s just a speculative investment that people buy into because they want to change it back to real money at some point in the future after its $ value has increased.
They do have some utility where banks are either too expensive or do not offer the service. The big one is anonymous transactions, and international transfers are much cheaper with crypto currency.
However I think you are right that their value is largely driven by speculation, as evidenced by them becoming much more useful during lockdown, but their value not reflecting that. If you are using crypto as a store of value I think you are taking a very big risk.
Last edited:
amadeus
Bishop of Bio-Dome
Fair point! I guess I’m too old-fashioned to get behind it? The amount of international banking I do is so trivial that the thought never occurred to me.
Lexicus
Deity
lol, no problem, I just looked at the number and looked again and was like wait...is that supposed to say 1994, 1993, or 1934?
Moriarte
Immortal
- Joined
- May 10, 2012
- Messages
- 2,687
There’s been a resurgence this year. Bitcoin went back to pre-crisis levels of $20k, other cryptos recovered significantly too. Crypto-mining is very profitable again. To give you some indication, at current prices, using cutting edge GPU, the ROI is less than two years. Which make these video cards a commodity more rare than gold, yet again. Current generation is all sold out, you can join the queue and reserve one at a cosmic price. Which isn’t surprising. GPU is a calculation device with a capability to make 36 trillion floating point operations per second. Doctors need it. Engineers want it. Also, gamers, miners, designers, researchers, coders and everyone else who can convert raw processing power into something tangible for themselves.
On challenges of decentralised finance: https://cointelegraph.com/news/defi...onvos-for-regulators-says-sec-s-hester-peirce
Ether, second largest CC, and a technological powerhouse in crypto space transitions to “proof of stake”, which is supposed to increase transaction throughput to multiple orders of magnitude, while cutting down on wastefulness significantly, since GPU’s won’t be needed to solve meaningless mathematical puzzles any more. More here: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/01/eth...currencys-network-starts-a-major-upgrade.html
Of course, bitcoin still going strong with specialised cryptographic devices sucking out insane amount of electricity, no change is planned there. There are giant “farms” now, worth billions, across the world, supported by institutional investors in places, where electricity is the cheapest: Iceland, Georgia (the one next to Armenia), China, etc. Some countries, well, those on the sidelines of international monetary highways, are quite welcoming to everything crypto, hoping, as such, to claim their place in the decentralised world.
On challenges of decentralised finance: https://cointelegraph.com/news/defi...onvos-for-regulators-says-sec-s-hester-peirce
Ether, second largest CC, and a technological powerhouse in crypto space transitions to “proof of stake”, which is supposed to increase transaction throughput to multiple orders of magnitude, while cutting down on wastefulness significantly, since GPU’s won’t be needed to solve meaningless mathematical puzzles any more. More here: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/01/eth...currencys-network-starts-a-major-upgrade.html
Of course, bitcoin still going strong with specialised cryptographic devices sucking out insane amount of electricity, no change is planned there. There are giant “farms” now, worth billions, across the world, supported by institutional investors in places, where electricity is the cheapest: Iceland, Georgia (the one next to Armenia), China, etc. Some countries, well, those on the sidelines of international monetary highways, are quite welcoming to everything crypto, hoping, as such, to claim their place in the decentralised world.
innonimatu
the resident Cassandra
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 15,374
It looks like bitcoin is going from a tool of money launderers to be another speculative asset plaything for our financial overlords. Hence even more detached from any real use.
As they make their money and power from the trades, not the price of assets they trade, anything they can convince other people to attach value to and speculate with is good for them. Bitcoins or gold or tulip bulbs, it's the same thing. They'll trade whatever they or others can can promote for trading regardless of use value.
I wonder if the social damage of bitcoin is sufficient that it's worth tilting against? I would never buy it, because I don't believe in providing price-support for something that is so environmentally damaging. But I mean actual legal efforts to get its value lowered.
The 'predicted' rush of it being placed as a hedge asset into more portfolios really seems to be happening. At least, the odds of it happening are high enough that it might warrant betting that it will happen.
The 'predicted' rush of it being placed as a hedge asset into more portfolios really seems to be happening. At least, the odds of it happening are high enough that it might warrant betting that it will happen.
innonimatu
the resident Cassandra
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 15,374
At least Tesla, evil though its controlling owner may be, produced something useful (hastened the EV alternative) out of being a pumped-up asset used as a plaything in finance.
Bitcoin is damage all the way: waste of energy in production, mostly support of criminality in real use, and now another plaything for the single most socially damaging "industry" in this planet, finance.
We discussed the environmental damage further up. Did we not decide that the environmental cost of a bitcoin transaction is is the same sort of magnitude as the electricity it cost? If that is the biggest environmental impact in what you are buying for bitcoin then that is pretty good. Is it worth than spending the same money on netflix?
ATM Bitcoin is three things: speculative investment tool to make money in its market; a daily use currency for regular people; and a tool for printing money. Over the long haul those three don't work well together, especially the first two. Until it figures out what it want to be, it will be a lesser player. Since it mostly a greed driven product, working that out may take a while and be difficult. Volatile, fast moving market driven products make lousy currencies for daily use. The consumption of vast resources to mine bitcoin is hardly a good use of those resources and will at some point get noticed.
What are the opportunity costs of all the electricity used to mine bitcoin?
Similar threads
