Subnostr

"Physical cost function protocols (a.k.a. proof-of-work protocols) are deceptively simple: they convert watts to bits. When people utilize computing networks like the Bitcoin network, they take watts as their input and convert them into proofs-of-watts as their output, which are then metaphorically described as some type of abstract object. Lost in the metaphors, computer and software engineers aren’t taking the time to consider the major technical differences in the underlying physics, despite how observably different it is. Why do these major technical differences go undetected? The author hypothesizes that it could be because proof-of-work represents an unprecedented approach to computing that software engineers aren’t recognizing yet because they have effectively been trained by their industry best practices to ignore what’s happening under the hood of their software by abstracting it away."

- Jason Lowery

Replying to

Primordial🦌

#Bitcoin #RealWorldDecentralization

"When people normally refer to an “object” instantiated by ordinary software, they are applying abstract and symbolic meaning to transistor state changes inside a computer using machine code to convert them to machine readable bits of information. These “objects” do not physically exist; people have arbitrarily choosen to describe the complex emergent behavior of their computer programs using metaphors like “objects” (e.g. folder, trash can, cloud, string) to make it easier for other people to understand the intended functionality and design of their computer programs. In other words, there is no spoon. All that physically exists is the physically unrestricted and infinitely expanding state space of countless state machines plugged together. Countless transistors are added together on circuit boards, and the combined state of those transistors is what we abstract as so-called “objects.” But underneath the metaphor is nothing but people converting transistor state changes to bits of information using a new type of symbolically and syntactically complex language.

Physical cost function protocols (a.k.a. proof-of-work protocols) like Bitcoin work differently. When people describe the real-world physical cost of solving a physical cost function protocol as if it were a quantifiable object (e.g. a proof, receipt, stamp, coin, or token), they’re using abstraction to describe a real, meaningful, physically scarce, physically constrained, thermodynamically restricted, path-dependent, and irrevocable quantity of physical power drawn out of shared objective physical reality. Therefore, whereas ordinary computer programs can only present the illusion of physical cost, physical cost function protocols like Bitcoin produce real-world physical cost. Whereas ordinary computer programs can only present the illusion of scarcity and decentralization, Bitcoin produces real-world scarcity and decentralization. This is possible because the underlying physical state-changing mechanism (i.e. massive quantities of watts) being converted into bits is, itself, physically real, physically scarce, and physically decentralized. You know that bits of information created by large quantities of physical power are real, scarce, and decentralized because power itself is real, scarce, and decentralized."

- Jason Lowery

This is one of my favorite quotes from the chapter where he completely dismantles proof-of-stake systems.