yes, you are right, the difficulty changes over time
In my example, that would mean the roulette changing the number of possible outcomes/numbers.
Good description, but the puzzles are not complex.
Run a roulette with billions of numbers. If the result is 0 you won, otherwise, try again, and again and again.
nothing complex
yes, totally agree.
They promote the only aspect in which Monero is better than Bitcoin, without accounting for the 3 other aspects that needed to be sacrificed...
Also, the Darkness of money depends on how big is the crowd you are hiding in.
And you cannot have a big crowd unless the money is the hardest.
Some people argue that saving in bitcoin and spending Monero gives you the best of both worlds, but I think that's BS.
Whenever you exchange Bitcoin for Monero, you decrease your privacy because the crowd you are hiding in is even smaller.
Lightning is the way to spend Bitcoin.
I agree that UTXOs are pseudonymous.
Anonymity is a stronger property, but I cannot see how anonymity can be implemented at the base layer without losing the auditability.
In my mind, that would be improving the Darkness by 1 step, but degrading the hardness by 3 steps, so totally not worth it.
And the market is showing that, Monero is losing against Bitcoin and will continue to lose over time.
this has been a particularly good soundscape for my current cryptography/math/game theory/topology ruminations
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sxAYum04mY
#music #ambient #soundscape
This is what I am using instead.
Yep. Another way to frame it is local vs global, but it's basically the same thing.
Elo suffers from inflation in chess, and in your idea would suffer even more (it would basically represent when you joined the network).
Implementing trust scores is the way, but they should not be global, but local!
https://github.com/pippellia-btc/The-Problem-of-Spam/tree/main
Local means that they are personalized based on the end user.
Yes, no such thing as continuity in the real world, real number are not physically real.
Buuut, they are very useful for making computations easiers.
I never disqualified the utility of the gaussian distribution, I simply pointed out the obvious that Gaussian != Uniform
> the expression "cryptographic hash function" itself implies apparent continuity of distribution.
No, it implies apparent uniformity of disitribution.
Continuity is another (topological) property.
f^(-1) (A) is an open set for every open set A.
Yeah yeah, in this we agree. I was just lazy.
One should say:
X is a random variable representing the choice of a message at random (under probability distribution PX).
Then h(X) is a random variable, that induce a different probably distribution bla bla.
continuous uniform distribution
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probability_distribution#Absolutely_continuous_probability_distribution which is commonly associated with gaussian normal distributions.
of course it's discrete integers but continuous implies total randomness since all bits are at play and not any holes in it or symmetries.
I don't understand why you say Gaussian, when it actual fact is uniform.
Also, it's discrete and not continuous, because the Image of all hash functions is discrete (countable infinity of rational numbers).
you probably wanted to say uniform distribution.
Hash function have the design goal of inducing a probability distribution on their image which is closer to a uniform distribution as possible.
So the probability that h(X) = k is the same for every k.
I think you are wrong because the probability of finding a valid block at trial number N should follow a Geometric Distribution.
The Geometric Distribution has the property of being "memoryless".
I realized yesterday that you were banned. So I started following you on Nostr instead.
How is the game progressing?
That's almost impossible to pull it off, damaging to the community and I don't think can work either.
One could always come up with ways to encode arbitrary data on the Blockchain.
The thing is that those ways will become uneconomical soon, so I am not worried too much.
It's very hard to do these things because some of them are contacting mining pools off band.
Preventing them to do so is virtually impossible