回复：比特币铸造在热力学上是反常的
原始发布页
打开来源页面查看 1 个交叉存档
这和黄金及金矿开采的情况一样。金矿开采的边际成本往往会维持在接近金价的水平。金矿开采是一种浪费，但这种浪费远远小于让黄金能够用作交换媒介所带来的效用。
我认为比特币的情况也会一样。比特币所促成的交换，其效用将远远超过所耗费的电力成本。因此，没有比特币才会造成净浪费。
引用 gridecon 于 2010 年 8 月 6 日 04:48:00 PM 的发言
总的来说，我也不同意新币生成所带来的极高计算负担确实是当前系统所必需的这一观点。据我理解，货币创造从根本上是由时间来计量的——如果时间才是根本性的控制变量，那么每个人为什么还需要在这段给定时间里“尽可能多地掷骰子”？币所有权与交易的“证明链”并不依赖于产生新币的方法。
每个节点对网络的影响力与其 CPU 算力成正比。要向网络表明你拥有多少 CPU 算力，唯一的办法就是实际使用它。
如果每个人还拥有某种数量有限、可供我们计数以实现一人一票的东西，我想不出那会是什么。IP 地址……大量获取它们要比获取 CPU 容易得多。
我想，或许可以在特定时刻测量 CPU 算力。例如，假如 CPU 算力挑战每 10 分钟平均只运行 1 分钟。这样你仍能证明自己在特定时刻的总算力，而不必一直运行。不过我不确定这该如何实现。一个当时并不在线的节点无法知道，过去的链是否真的是按包含 9 分钟间歇的工作周期生成的，而不是连续不断地生成的。
工作量证明有一个很好的特性：它可以经由不受信任的中间人传递。我们不必担心通信的保管链。无论是谁把一条最长链告诉你都没关系，工作量证明本身就足以说明一切。
英文原文
展开英文原文
It's the same situation as gold and gold mining. The marginal cost of gold mining tends to stay near the price of gold. Gold mining is a waste, but that waste is far less than the utility of having gold available as a medium of exchange.
I think the case will be the same for Bitcoin. The utility of the exchanges made possible by Bitcoin will far exceed the cost of electricity used. Therefore, not having Bitcoin would be the net waste.
Quote from: gridecon on August 06, 2010, 04:48:00 PM
As an overall point, I also do not agree with the idea that the very high computational burden of coin generation is in fact a necessity of the current system. As I understand it, currency creation is fundamentally metered by TIME - and if that is the fundamental controlling variable, what is the need for everyone to "roll as many dice as posible" within that given time period? The "chain of proof" for coin ownership and transactions doesn't depend on the method for spawning coins.
Each node's influence on the network is proportional to its CPU power. The only way to show the network how much CPU power you have is to actually use it.
If there's something else each person has a finite amount of that we could count for one-person-one-vote, I can't think of it. IP addresses... much easier to get lots of them than CPUs.
I suppose it might be possible to measure CPU power at certain times. For instance, if the CPU power challenge was only run for an average of 1 minute every 10 minutes. You could still prove your total power at given times without running it all the time. I'm not sure how that could be implemented though. There's no way for a node that wasn't present at the time to know that a past chain was actually generated in a duty cycle with 9 minute breaks, not back to back.
Proof-of-work has the nice property that it can be relayed through untrusted middlemen. We don't have to worry about a chain of custody of communication. It doesn't matter who tells you a longest chain, the proof-of-work speaks for itself.