Did you read this?
nostr:note1thfv907z7345qz26d5gwjqcr653qqvp7hjlnvpmq53rq9txqh7kqz8h8jy
Discussion
You’re not answering my question
Yes I opened it. I read it. It did not pertain to anything I said. In 2020, I received a university funded grant. During that time, I did a massive deep dive on quantum physics. I’m *once again* not talking about quantum compute.
What are you talking about? You literally said this:
there’s a chance AI labs have already stumbled upon compute that would be a threat to modern day cryptography and broader encryption schemes.
Yes, I said that. And I meant it.
What are you fucking asking me!? Holy shit… this conversation makes no sense
I’m sorry. That was rude and not a way to talk to another human but I’m lost and you’re acting like I’m not making sense but you are not making sense
I have only asked questions. I haven’t made any points so idk what the confusion is about. You said you weren’t talking about quantum compute in the last note I replied to. But the quote I posted from you was talking about quantum compute.
nostr:note1sl0mddct5wc3p4rdh2p9xe5zys8vqlxzjsl7zhlyx6ez6a4cxatsreek4e
You have made a point! Your point was that you aren’t worried about quantum computing?
I agreed! Neither am I!
I am, however, worried about advancements in hardware that may be able to perform the same operations that everyone equates to the quantum compute capability
You referred back to the quantum compute article you posted… I questioned why as it does not pertain to my comments about parallel programming languages and advancements in low level hardware optimization
Understand that bitcoin core is written in a programming language… this programming language allows for very fast math at a low level (ie, hash math) the difficulty adjustment/ hr is the product of multiple nodes running math in parallel until one discovers the correct block and earns a mining reward
That’s my opinion but I’m asking questions to understand if I should change my opinion.
Half this message doesn’t make sense to me because I’m not a programmer. Can you explain it in a simpler way?
Yes, I will do my best as I also don’t consider myself a programmer. Some of this you probably already know but to build on logic.
As you know, bitcoin relies on mining validation to discover blocks. This is done using hardware that does “hash math”. Once upon a time, we used CPUs but now we use ASICS.
ASICs are much much faster than anything else at completing this math because they were optimized to do ONLY that.
But ASICS are just chips- the result of low level builds. Low level means that the programming language gives the operator direct control over the systems hardware.
Bitcoin software uses C++ programming language.
C++ software uses things like pointers etc (this allowed us to be able to basically give our Bitcoin address’ to live at and other weird things but it’s dependent on hardware/software sync).
the miner itself (aside from the ASIC chip which runs the hash math) requires instructions to operate. miners use ARM and I’ve recently seen arguments for x86… but these are proprietary meaning there’s rules to using these”instructions” (see tarriffs, fees, or vendor lock ins)
Whereas, RISC-V and even other even newer (and potentially more lightweight) ISAs (instruction sets) offer competition as they are open source models and open source iterates v quickly.
All of this is to say ASICS could be better… they could become faster potentially and whoever has early access to that hardware that does optimize… would be the fastest in the world at validating blocks and potentially other operational forms of compute.
No quantum computer required.
So you’re worried that a new mining hardware will be created that will be so good at mining that the other miners won’t be able to compete. And you’re worried that this hardware will only be in the hands of bad actors that will control the entire network. And you’re worried that no one else will be able to get their hands on this hardware to compete with them for the rest of time?
I’m worried that there is exactly one group of people working on this and their motivations are at odds with the success of Bitcoin, yes
I understand now. I’m not really concerned because I think that eventually it will become the new standard. The same way GPUs and ASICs became the new standard.
I agree, which circles bc to my point about.... as long as it is not concentrated in the hands of the few. Do you see what I mean now
I can’t think of any technology that stayed concentrated in the hands of a few indefinitely.
How would you know? You would never be given access to information like that if it existed
I guess I wouldn’t but if that technology was being used, people would notice. And if the technology is never used, then who cares?
We would all know that technology exists once they start mining. Then the miners would rally to try and catch up.
Sure. Or people running homebrew systems would tell you. But I digress… still a great conversation for nostr. Thanks 🙏
My guy… I literally have the Planck constant tattood on my arm
