Re: [bitcoin-dev] Properties of an ideal PoW algorithm & implementation

2017-04-19 Thread Bram Cohen via bitcoin-dev
Repeatedly hashing to make it so that lossy implementations just fail sounds like a great idea. Also relying on a single crypto primitive which is as simple as possible is also a great idea, and specifically using blake2b is conservative because not only is it simple but its block size is larger th

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Properties of an ideal PoW algorithm & implementation

2017-04-19 Thread praxeology_guy via bitcoin-dev
Natanael, === Metal Layers === One factor in chip cost other than transistor count is the number of layers required to route all the interconnects in the desired die area constraint. The need for fewer layers can result in less patent-able costs of layering technology. Fewer layers are quicker

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Properties of an ideal PoW algorithm & implementation

2017-04-19 Thread Tim Ruffing via bitcoin-dev
On Tue, 2017-04-18 at 12:34 +0200, Natanael via bitcoin-dev wrote: > To prove that an implementation is near optimal, you would show > there's a minimum number of necessary transistor activations per > computed hash, and that your implementation is within a reasonable > range of that number.  I'm

[bitcoin-dev] Properties of an ideal PoW algorithm & implementation

2017-04-18 Thread Natanael via bitcoin-dev
To expand on this below; Den 18 apr. 2017 00:34 skrev "Natanael" : IMHO the best option if we change PoW is an algorithm that's moderately processing heavy (we still need reasonably fast verification) and which resists partial state reuse (not fast or fully "linear" in processing like SHA256) jus