CPU

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The Monero Moon (Issue 87) highlights recent developments in the Monero ecosystem, including updates on privacy enhancements, wallet improvements, and community projects. Key updates include the introduction of a spy node ban list to enhance transaction privacy, progress on RandomX v2 for CPU mining, and advancements in privacy upgrades like FCMP++ and CARROT. New tools like MoneroDroid and Monero One aim to improve accessibility, while events like MoneroTopia 2026 and MoneroKon 2026 focus on fostering community engagement and privacy advocacy. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

TheWatchers666

Dunno....I didn't see anything pop up just yet. There were 2 last year worldwide and nothing since. The pool I'm in, and all others inc...just gonna check now and CPU passive mining I do at night....5.6e+4 years...that's 56,000 years of digging 😅

OkEmu7082

Because after the attack the CPU /GPU still have value. If you attack a coin with asic friendly pow, all your asic become useless.

_GOREHOUND_

Okay, I’ll play along… The red one. I’d go back to 2009. Back then you could mine CPU-only. Difficulty was ~1 and the block reward was 50 BTC. CPU: ~1 MH/s Mining: 12 hours/day At difficulty ~1 that works out to roughly ~500 BTC/day on average (expectation, in reality it’s lumpy: you might hit zero for ages, then land a block). Even if you haircut it hard for bad luck, downtime, and difficulty creeping up, say divide by 5, you’re still at ~100 BTC/day in early 2009. One month at that pace: ~3,000 BTC. BOOM!!!

BigCurrentNews

[oilrig. io/](https://oilrig.io/) [https://oilrig.io/](https://oilrig.io/) Start earning OIL tokens in just three simple steps. No expensive hardware required – just your browser and CPU. Buy in Solana Phantom wallet o5XguNKkz71K37BJsAhyMJnatwwbJ9MdixSmDW6pump NFL [youtube.com/watch?v=jFX07LCTrSM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFX07LCTrSM) [youtube.com/watch?v=vZhKi3vZUtw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZhKi3vZUtw) [youtube.com/watch?v=u\_rMoQs18vI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_rMoQs18vI)   Los Angeles Rams vs Chicago Bears Game Highlights | 2025 NFL Season Divisional Round [youtube.com/watch?v=qy3nzv9xps0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qy3nzv9xps0) 24 Hour Slovakia FOOD TOUR | Eating TRADITIONAL Slovak STREET FOOD in Bratislava Slovakia

FromThePits

I really appriciate your dedication. Also the estimate on CPU runtime. Thank you. I promised some other redditor to release the xpub early next week, if that is useful to you? He wanted to verify the 0.01 BTC incentive is real. I promise its still there. I just checked. Other than that - the challenge is the challenge. You'll probably waste more electricity than its worth with that PC? Maybe you can team up with someone? Get some more hashing going.

ConsistentMidnight57

Yea but CPU processing isnt the equivalent of the energy of cloud based compute

MinimalGravitas

Where have you got your daft ideas and overconfidence on this from? > Nodes can reject suspicious reorgs No they can't, nodes will always follow the longest chain, which will be the one being mined by the attacker in our scenario as they have over 50% of the hash power. Here is Satoshi explaining why this has to be the case: > *It is strictly necessary that the longest chain is always considered the valid one. Nodes that were present may remember that one branch was there first and got replaced by another, but there would be no way for them to convince those who were not present of this. We can't have subfactions of nodes that cling to one branch that they think was first, others that saw another branch first, and others that joined later and never saw what happened. The CPU power proof-of-work vote must have the final say. The only way for everyone to stay on the same page is to believe that the longest chain is always the valid one, no matter what.* [https://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/emails/cryptography/6/] ---------------------- > exchanges can pause or raise confirmations That makes no difference to the chain... or anything we are discussing. If an attacker is mining empty blocks and censoring all transactions then there is nothing to be confirmed anyway! > miners can switch pools instantly This also makes no difference to our scenario... if the attacker has over 50% of the mining power then it doesn't matter how other miners distribute their hashpower between pools, they are irrelevant. > hash power can relocate geographically Again, sure they can, but that makes no difference to anything we are discussing. > social coordination can neutralize the attacker The only possible action the social layer can take is to fork Bitcoin onto a new consensus layer so that it is no longer mined by PoW ASICs, as I noted above. This would 'neutralize' all miners, the attacker and all honest miners. It is also worth noting that the only chain to successfully change consensus mechanism (Ethereum) took multiple years to do so, and that is with about 4x as many devs and a well established testing and protocol upgrade pathway. The idea that Bitcoin could successfully coordinate and implement a fork away from mining, while the chain was being attacked, and with a goal that would bankrupt all the mining farms, on a timescale short enough for people to not just give up on the network... seems pretty far fetched. ---------------- > An attacker would need to maintain dominance indefinitely, The scenario we were discussing was a hostile nation state building manufacturing facilities that churned out ASICs faster than than Bitmain etc, so yes the attacker could remain dominant for as long as they like. > while continuing to pay enormous operating costs Firstly, remember that the attacker is collecting all the block rewards, while the 'defenders' block rewards are being reverted with each reorg. Secondly, the operating costs are not the biggest chunk of the attack's cost. Assuming that the attacking nation state didn't just divert energy for the ASICs for free, the cost of electricity would be a few millions of dollars per day, compared to the total cost of ASIC manufacturing and infrastructure which would be tens of billions, the running costs are not significant (which you would know if you had read the Breaking BFT paper I linked to above). ------------------ > It’s like saying there’s a .01% chance it might rain today so pack your umbrella. It is very clear that you don't actually know how Bitcoin works. That's fine, and easily fixed if you are interested. I would suggest reading 'Mastering Bitcoin' by Andreas M. Antonopoulos, which you can do for free at: https://github.com/bitcoinbook/bitcoinbook/blob/develop/BOOK.md Another good resource, less technical but perhaps helpful for a beginner is 'Learn Me a Bitcoin. They have a pretty good explanation of a 51% attack, which will really help you undestand what we are talking about here: https://learnmeabitcoin.com/technical/blockchain/51-attack/ The explanation of why nodes can't reject reorgs I posted above came from the Nakamoto Institute, where they have loads of resources that let you see how bitcoi was first developed and the discussions around how it is designed and why those choices were made: https://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/ Hopefully you'll find that lot interesting, feel free to come back to this discussion if you need any further misunderstandings cleared up.

pop-1988

You're right, RandomX is portable to RISC-V. Also RISC-V is an open architecture, very cheap to build with. It happened that the big ASIC manufacturer doesn't need to make a RandomX ASIC. They only need to design a 6-CPU RISC-V board, contract a chip foundry to make energy efficient RISC-V chips, put 3 boards in a box, and sell it for 30% of the price of the currently preferred multi-core Ryzen CPU Cheaper to buy, consumes 80% less electricity, isn't an ASIC > All this human ingenuity And the ASIC corp still wins, by not building an ASIC

Aggressive-Fact1156

los primeros mineros de bitcoin, con CPU

DangerHighVoltage111

> Bitcoin is secured by its node network That's bullshit. And the WP quote does not support your statement at all. It supports mine. That you don't even understand that makes you absolutely unfit for any discussion. If you want to know why, ask yourself what Satoshi meant my more CPU power. Or ask if you honestly want to know.

pop-1988

Bitcoin is secured by its node network Security doesn't come from the hashrate. If people expect the mining hashrate to make Bitcoin secure, they shouldn't buy it The Bitcoin white paper explicitly states this qualification **The system is secure as long as honest nodes collectively control more CPU power than any cooperating group of attacker nodes** This isn't a rallying cry to encourage a permanent exponential growth in hash rate. If anything, it could be interpreted indirectly as warning against hoarding In the inverse, it means this ... The security provided by the decentralized node network using the Bitcoin consensus protocol does not protect against an attack by an entity which gains 51% of the hash rate The hoarder crowd believes that by loudly shouting "digital gold" they make Bitcoin change into a hoarding asset by positive thinking, as advocated by the snake oil salesman Reverend Peale. Bitcoin is defined by the software. In all its 17 years, the Bitcoin software has never been changed from an Internet payment method into any of those fantasies - store of value, digital gold, hedge against inflation It's not even scarce

Billkr

There is no way to mine Bitcoin from your phone. PC CPU and GPU mining died years ago. If you want to mine bitcoin, purchase a Bitaxe miner and lottery mine.

digitalr3lapse

They can technically mine sha-256 (btc's algorithm. Here are some stats ai spot out. Reguarless is they are 100% correct... The odds are astronomical. You are MUCH better off playing the lottery "Attempting to solo mine a Bitcoin block with a standard PC CPU is virtually impossible for earning Bitcoin today. It's not about luck but about the extreme difference in computing power between your computer and professional mining setups. To show you why, let's compare the hash rates: · 🔬 Your PC's CPU · Hash Rate Example: 0.0001 GH/s (100 MH/s) · Representative Hardware: Consumer CPU (e.g., Intel Core i7) · 🏭 Entry-Level ASIC Miner (considered minimal for solo mining) · Hash Rate Example: 6 TH/s (6,000 GH/s) · Representative Hardware: Older-generation ASIC (e.g., Antminer S9) · ⚡ Modern ASIC Miner (competitive hardware) · Hash Rate Example: 140 TH/s (140,000 GH/s) · Representative Hardware: Bitmain Antminer S19 XP · 🌐 Total Bitcoin Network · Hash Rate Example: ~500,000,000 TH/s (500 EH/s) · Note: This is the combined power your PC competes against. 🤔 Understanding the Odds and Challenges The chance of finding a block is your hash rate divided by the network's total hash rate. · With a PC CPU: Your probability in any given 10-minute window is astronomically small—effectively zero. It would take billions of years on average. · Even with a single ASIC: A miner with 270 TH/s had a 1-in-30,000 chance per day (roughly once every 82 years on average). · Recent "Luck" Stories: In late 2025, a miner with just 6 TH/s beat 1-in-180-million daily odds to win a block. Another with 270 TH/s had a 1-in-30,000 daily chance. These are considered extreme lottery-level wins.

downtherabbit

What does that even mean. Quantum computing is a THEORY. A lot of quantum mechanics isn't even proven, it is just pretty maths. The closest we will get to "Quantum computing" is figuring out how to store a bit on an electron spinning around a neutron. And to make this useful for computing you would need something that could 'read' that particle to ask if it is a zero or one without changing it from a zero to one. Then you would need another mechanism that changes the way the electron spun from a zero to one. Then you would need to create another standard of defining what an electrons position around a neutron constitutes a one or a zero. Traditional gates with electrical current passing through them wouldn't work. Another option would be to leave our entire binary system behind (for which you would need to throw away UNIX, and create a completely new software and electrical engineering field from the ground up) and use the cosine of the angle of the electron from the neutron to give out a number between 1-360. You could use every group of subsequent four numbers and create an entire new field using base-60 (Sexagesimal) and using every group of subsequent four numbers would be a form of error correction (ECC). So each bit in sexagesimal would be represented by a possibility of four numbers from 1-360. And it would be the same as before, you would need to define what the electrons position around the nucleus correspods to what number. You would need to create a completely new invention that could reliably keep an electron in a certain space or side of the particle (using electromagnetism), and you would need one of these completely new inventions attached to EACH particle. Then you would need a completely new invention that could read the electrons position reliably, whilst corresponding to the input of the other new invention. None of these inventions work. And figuring out how to make them so small that could attach to a single particle without having an impact on other particles around it would require also an entirely new field of technology and physics that doesn't even exist yet. So even if you did all of this. You would have a series of particles running in series that would have to be insulated from all total outside EMF inteference like a faraday cage of sorts which again would require completely new inventions and a new field of science in itself. After all that. You would just have.... a very fast CPU..... And it still wouldn't be able to "speed up" the block speed. It could only be used to increase the hashrate of bitcoin mining. And it still wouldn't break SHA-256 encryption. All faster compute power over the next century is going to do is this. Wont break Bitcoin encyption, and wont break Bitcoin's fundamental code (block rate). It will only increase the hashrate. In short, whoever breaks moore's law and sees a massive improvement in CPU compute power over a very short time without other people having the technology yet will be able to take over the mining pool instantly and take up a large portion of the hashrate, and effectively own all brand new bitcoin. This is the possibility of "QuAnTuM ComPutInG" and the only thing we should be scared of. As this would centralise all new bitcoin to a single entity.

Virtualization_Freak

This is just outright wrong. Blockchain adapts difficulty to match mining throughput, with the goal to average out to 10 minute blocks. Remember the days when BTC was just CPU mined? Still on average 10 minute blocks. Then GPUs, then FPGA, then ASICs. Hash rate kept exploding, but the blocks average the same.

AutoModerator

Post is by: Jealous_Rip7223 and the url/text [ ](https://goo.gl/GP6ppk)is: /r/CryptoMarkets/comments/1q1qnwx/please_check_out_the_new_site_and_honest_leave/ I’m excited to announce that I have a new website for you guys: [**https://thecryptosteer.com**](https://thecryptosteer.com/). completely registered business. paypal supported. I’ve put a lot of work, time, and investment into this. If you’d like to support me by supporting you, get yourself access to the premium features (details below). Please leave feedback below — or for a faster response, suggestions, or support, use the contact page on the website. # About the website It includes market data, market graphs, crypto news, crypto guides, and a probability calculator for CPUs, ASICs, and GPUs — designed to be a user-friendly “everything you need” hub to track / learn / explore crypto. It also includes options for tailored newsletters, alerts, and more. Basically: your crypto powerhouse dashboard. No ads currently. No BS. Soon, we’ll also be selling crypto mining hardware in the shop, and my tools that I develop (like the Kali/XMRig Docker image). The Android miner (actually capable of mining at some decent hashes) will also be available for download in the near future from the site. # [The Crypto Steer](https://www.thecrypttosteer.com/) — current promotional period Users who sign up for a premium account within the first two months will get promotional pricing at **$1.99/month** for the premium account. # The first 100 to sign up **The first 100** people to sign up for premium will receive access to the premium plan at **$1.99/month for an entire year**, regardless of price changes. Premium unlocks access to the tools listed below: # CryptoSteer Premium Tools * **Custom Price Alerts** * **CPU Benchmark Test** * **Custom Watchlists** * **Custom Portfolio Tracker and Builder** * **Custom Saved Market Live Graphs** * **Saved News** * **Beta Access to Upcoming Tools** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoMarkets) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Romanizer

If you bought in 2009 you would be very famous as you would have been the only person able to do that. And also a bit dumb, as you could just mine thousands per day on your CPU.

0x456

Wen RAM, GPU, CPU RWAs.....?

Littlestan

Gridcoin (GRC) Started off much like Folding@Home where you donated GPU/CPU cycles to projects that actually directly contributed to real life projects and humanist goals. Dev soon enabled ASIC support when they were fresh on the scene and it destroyed the entire narrative of altruistic intent as the blockchain was immediately dominated by the few equipped to go bonkers on it then flood the market. An attempt was made to balance/scale the rewards eventually but not before the damage was done.

musr

I was like, "I absolutely do find this interesting and would like to do it. However, my procrastination wetware dictates that I shelf it for later." After CPU mining is no longer viable. Then GPU, then FPGA, then ASIC (need a farm). Then the dip and the dip after the peak,...

DarkKnight905

In 2010 you could set up CPU mining BTC node and claim 50 btc block reward multiple times

No_Arachnid_5563

Hi! I used a standard Google Colab Free Tier CPU, and it only takes a few minutes!

firsthemic

So, do we know his brand of CPU or  something specific? 

stellarfirefly

I've performed two full syncs recently on different nodes, and they both required just over 24 hours. It really depends mostly upon your internet bandwidth and your hard drive's throughput (don't use FAT32 if possible). Your CPU and RAM are factors only if you are running close to the limits of your node software.

MatteAce

but is it constrained by physics? it’s the protocol that defines the difficulty of the proof. ASIC miners has taken advantage of this to cut everybody else’s off from mining. If there was no ASIC technology, or if the coin was code-constrained to be CPU-bound, we’d still be mining with our home PC probably.

Amphibious333

No, that's not happening anymore. The mining difficulty level we have today requires operations at industrial scales. You can't mine on a consumer grade CPU or GPU or even a small dedicated miner. The returns will be insignificant.

SmugPolyamorist

Not true. The earliest versions of the bitcoin client had CPU mining functionality included, and it was still worthwhile for most of 2010. Early 2010, difficulty was 1, and it was still under 20 until the summer. 1MH/s, performance achievable from eg. a Athlon 3800 X2, already out of date by that point, would be good enough for nearly a block (50BTC) an hour in January, and about a block a day by June. If you could buy a PC like that, or just use a public one, or get an office job and use one at work, you could easily amass a fortune - about 100,000 BTC by the end of summer. 100k BTC is enough that you wouldn't have to wait long to be rich. The price spiked up over $20 in mid 2011, sell 10k at that price and you're comfortably off until late 2013 when it went up to $1k, and you'd have about $100m.

RetiredAvocado

"Nodes" expend "CPU" power. Solve a "puzzle." "Validates" the block. "Longest" chain. Irrelevant equations.

Heisenberg2nd

In the end, among all these L1s, it seems absurd but only Pi Network seems to have embarked on a machine-to-machine payment path and a node can be a laptop, it doesn't need power but scalability and a high number of cores/threads. When it will be used with OpenMind you'll be able to decide how much CPU to use for the required computing power and you get paid in PI, micro payments will be made in USDC, there's already the Circle-OpenMind agreement. I thought it was a sort of useless crypto but if someone has been following in recent months, now more than 400,000 PCs are connected in testnet, when they move to mainnet it will be one of the largest decentralized networks in the world. I tried it too and obviously I don't have high economic returns but I also don't have high hardware/electricity bill expenses because PC is idle and I can work in the meantime.

Aggressive_Spell2314

P2P via Paypal, CPU mining, free giveaways

AlternativePaint6

You must have built your own CPU and OS and browser and router, yes? Or what, you trust the third party code and hardware for CPU and OS and browser and router? 🤣

deefjuh

Funny you say that: That’s how I got into crypto in 2010. Always had SETI@home running in the background, till I stumbled upon Bitcoin. And I solo’d for some time with CPU mining, thought: ha, nice system, and… switched to protein folding. I hope my protein folding solved some rare disease or something…

outofofficeagain

ASICS are basically the sha256 algorithm in hardware, it can physically do anything other than hash, it's not a CPU. It's not a GPU. 

Aggressive_Spell2314

you deleted your reply. you responded to my post and said you couldn’t buy bitcoin because there was no market in 2009. from what I remember, you got BTC for either CPU mining or through P2P transaction.

I_Stabbed_Jon_Snow

I learned C++ by finding shitcoin wallets codebase exploits in their github repos. I’ve CPU mined blocks on an active X11 chain. I’ve successfully 51% attacked a $10,000,000+ marketcap coin with my discord buddies so we could fork it to a stable codebase when malicious actors had controlled it for weeks. I worked for a top-15 cybersecurity where my only job was to school their C-suite in crypto: politics, taxes, tech, and people. I helped one of my buddies with a personal project which accidentally resulted in every major exchange on the planet pausing trading of masternode-based coins for days. My Twitter threads educating people about how masternodes work had tens of thousands of interactions. Another of my posts played a part in the downfall of Cryptobridge on the BitShares platform. You weren’t kidding when you asked about XMR, and you’re still a noob to me.

Aggressive_Spell2314

Back in 2009, my friend was talking about buying 20,000 Bitcoins at 15 cents each. His brother was talking about CPU mining in his one-bed room apartment. I didn’t buy any. I thought they were playing with board game coins. Things were very different back then.

nassauboy9

Well in since the days of CPU mining 🙂. I'm here and so I like to sell and trade a bit, I do. People say 1 BTC = 1BTC true however 126k = 1BTC 126k = 1.56 BTC at 80k (if sold and repurchased) Now granted its timing,sure. So I play all my BTC no Do I believe in BTC long term, obviously However I would not criticize people trading. A market is how we got here. My recommendation is not to be 100 out.

RetiredAvocado

Use v30. Use the best hardware you have, with fastest CPU and SSD, and lowest I/O. You can copy it back to a slower system after it's done.

EasyTradition9843

Right now it's exactly 888 GB on nvme drive. I ordered a cheap mini pc from AliExpress with N150 CPU, 16 gigs of ram and 2 TB drive. The sync took around 16 hours - even though I am on 1 Gbps symmetric fiber.

McKain337

You are absolutely correct, but with the rise of mobile GPUs, they might be soon. Although that's not my reasoning here. As it sits most mininable coins, they have a high barrier of entry for the average consumer. By high i mean that they have to touch a computer. More and more of our computer uses over the last few decades have moved to mobile. Except for the elites of their respective fields. Most people still use a laptop, though most don't have a GPU, and the ones that do are outstripped by ASICs. Sure, there are a few CPU coins like Monero, but it's not really mobile friendly. And It's the only coin I'm aware of with a 1 click mining button. Older clients for coins like BTC had this, but they removed the ability for the basic user to contribute to the network. Im hoping that if we can get at least one mobile chain working well, other more notable ones will follow; allowing the average consumer to contribute once again if they wish. The average joe doesn't want to pull out a laptop or go sit at a desk and fiddle with multiple programs. They just want to hit the pretty icon on their phone screen and let it run. The learning curve is so steep, even though you and I know it takes less than 30 min to set up most mining programs that creating a single config file gives them a panic attack. Eventually, I hope for a single app that will function as a node, wallet, and miner for anyone who wants to be a part of the network. Sorry, I rambled. That turned into a book.

HSuke

Monero is already well known to be insecure against 51% attacks, though this is using CPU botnets, not GPU ones. It had a 18-block reorg several months ago. Zcash is also suspected to be insecure, but so far hasn't experienced a major attack. Both Zcash and Monero dev teams have suggested longterm solutions for using PoS in addition to PoW because PoS is much, much, much more secure than PoW and can provide a finality layer.

findingkieron

Mining Bitcoin means using your computer’s hardware — CPU, GPU, or usually an ASIC chip — to solve a very difficult mathematical puzzle. The machine is basically trying billions of guesses per second to find the right answer. The more computing power you have, the more guesses you can try. It’s like having more lottery tickets. More power = more chances of “winning” the block reward. WHY Mine When someone sends Bitcoin, the transaction gets broadcast to the network . Miners pick up those transactions, verify them, and put them into a block. To confirm that block, miners must solve the puzzle (proof-of-work). This process secures the network and prevents fraud. False transactions Once a miner solves the puzzle, the block is confirmed, added to the blockchain, and the miner earns newly-created Bitcoin as a rewardor shared via a mini g pool. So basically your computer is guessing a answer to a code (Hash) and the one when gets it is rewarded and the reason for doing it is to confirm the transactions. When moving money in real life you have to interact with a middle man. The bank. Bit coin avoids the middle man

anon-187101

Maybe a soft-fork is the least controversial approach then. Of course, I'd have to accept that, but I just don't like the idea of rich people with QCs just being able to take Satoshi's coins, lost coins, etc. For such people, it'd be like CPU mining when the block reward was 50 BTC. Leaves a bad taste in my mouth, personally.

PoisonWaffle3

I got in at around $2 actually, but I was a broke college kid and didn't have any real money to invest in it. I just held on to some of what I mined on my gaming PC at the time. I mined on two mid range GPUs and a quad core CPU, ended up with about 5 BTC by the end of 2011. I've bought and sold over the years (selling at the peaks of cycles, buying back in at the bottom), and in general have done pretty dang well with it. The plan is to retire in about five years around age 40, and to travel the world with my wife to find a nice place to settle down. Probably somewhere with a beach and/or a view.

Maybe_Factor

Yes and no. Any new cryptocurrency using PoW in the way Bitcoin uses it has a decision to make: 1. Use SHA-256 like bitcoin, and get access to huge amounts of hashrate from existing bitcoin miners 2. Use another hash algorithm and go through the process of building hashrate in the same way bitcoin did (CPU mining > GPU mining > FPGA mining > ASIC mining) In any case, it doesn't mean bitcoin is unique. Bitcoin was just first.

wetdro420

You sound like AI now when I ask for help or explain what it is and the speed no offense. lol......If you were to do it the traditional way then yes you would probably get the same 10k-20k max that a CPU can actually handle without getting too hot. However I came up with a custom algorithm/pipeline/system however you want to define it. Just thinking outside the box a little. In fact anyone who understands cryptography probably knows the way I am doing this. Although having everything work together is tricky. It's not something I made overnight it took me months. If it wasn't for my custom method then no matter how much optimizations I do I wouldn't be able to break 20k. Give me two mnemonics you know and only give me 8 words for one and 9 words for the other. Should be able to solve both of them in like 40 mins. I have been tinkering with cryptography and brute force scripts for a few years now, however only about 9 months on this one tool. It's a culmination of everything over the years. Ive spent so much time and effort that what may seem normal or simple to me may not be to someone else, so who knows maybe what I came up with is unique or special, I just assume I am not so someone else probably has thought of or done the same thing.

Ninjanoel

free coins for a couple weeks of your CPU time? how bad would the project have to be for you to consider your time wasted?

rush87y

Blockchain isn’t secured by CPU power alone it’s secured by complex mathematics, specifically cryptographic hash functions like SHA-256. CPU or ASIC power just performs the math at massive scale but actual security comes from the cryptographic difficulty of reversing or faking those hashes. Without that math all the computing power in the world wouldn’t matter. and even that math isn’t invincible because quantum computing will eventually break the cryptography it relies on. Once quantum machines can efficiently reverse SHA-256 or derive private keys from public ones BTC entire security model collapses. It’s not a question of if, but when. The only defense will be migrating to quantum-resistant algorithms, and that’s not a trivial upgrade for a global decentralized networks. Now about that “the traditional banking system would fail before BTC,” I'm sorry but man that's just wishful thinking. Banks depend on regulation, liquidity, and policy, not hash power. Bitcoin’s network is technically resilient, but its value still relies on human trust and speculative belief. Don't get me wrong, Bitcoin can survive a bank run, but not a collapse in confidence and DEFINITELY not the inevitable quantum breakthrough.

TheUnholyMoly

The block chain is secured by CPU power, not complex mathematics. Your traditional banking system would fail before BTC

MaximumStudent1839

This is absolutely true. They took all the narratives and meshed them together, creating a Frankenstein narrative for ZEC. It is crazy because they put a lot of incoherent, potentially conflicting narratives into one package. 1) They called it the purest thing closest to Bitcoin from a distribution and technical level. It makes absolutely no sense. Bitcoiners hounded Ethereans to this day because of the ETH's premine. But these ZEC shills don't even seem to know ZEC had a premine and a dev tax before this month. Bitcoiners are also dogmatic small blockers. That dogmatism spun off opposition like Bitcoin Cash. Pure Bitcoiners also hate PoS and are dogmatic about PoW. ZEC's roadmap of turning to big blocks and PoS conflicts with this dogma. ZEC isn't even privacy by default. If you are happy with ZEC's departure from BTC, Ethereum should be a better bet from a technical standpoint. 2) One of the key things about Monero is decentralization as a privacy coin. It is why it prioritized CPU mining. ZEC seems pretty much capitulated to ASICs.

Archophob

So, now is the time when everyone who got a few hundred BTC in the early days of CPU mining decides to finally get their Lambo. Makes sense.

UnluckyAd8985

Thank you for the reply. And you have considered how much more capable modern GPUs are? I don't know enough about them, I could look up specs, but public specs wouldn't tell me raw hashing power, I'd probably have to know some physics and mathematics to get a probable answer. Then getting public estimates of the number of GPU's might be tough, too. I suppose you could go into some of NVIDIA public disclosures of earnings and deduct a decent guess. But again, a bit above my pay grade. I agree with you that a short lived 51 percent attack would not be a terminal problem. However, a constant dominant presence, a hasher that could do what bitcoin farms have done to your own PC's CPU, would clearly centralize the protocol, and take away two of its most cherished qualities, decentralization, and uh, oh what's the other one--censorship resistance, that's it. And with censorship resistance gone, then I suppose pseudo-anonymity . Well, %uck it, is was psuedo from the beginning. Everyone knew better...Cheers again.

pet2pet1993

Bitcoin can nothing , due to fundamental failures : transparent blockchain for all, fixed block size - transactions bottleneck, ASIC mining - monopolisation. Monero can: strictly private blockchain, adaptive block size for transactions, common CPU mining algorithm (ASIC resistant). Also tail emission makes transaction fees consistently tiny, and allows economics based on Monero to grow by a linear law.

downtherabbit

Nah they are lying and hiding the secret CPU mining knowledge!! (at least that's how this post reads LOL)

crunchyeyeball

Bitcoin Core used to include a built-in miner, but this was dropped in version 0.13 when CPU mining had long since become obsolete: https://bitcoin.org/en/release/v0.13.0#removal-of-internal-miner You can still download the source code for older versions if you want to learn how it works/worked though.

CheeseWeezel

What do you mean "no-trace" of this information? Surely its out there. What we did back then was go into the "mining" tab of Bitcoin Qt (now Bitcoin Core) and just turn on mining. It was a built-in function of the Bitcoin desktop app, not a seperate miner app. Several of the early GPU mining software had a CPU function built-in. Those were transitionary periods, so those clients still used the getwork protocol and could still be directly pointed to your local Bitcoin Qt app for solo mining.

SherbetFluffy1867

Confused. Are you clueless, trolling or actually saying that people should mine Bitcoin using CPU/GPU instead of ASICs?

TheBigGrief

To late for what? Too late to turn CPU mined BTC into a fortune? YES Too late to sell Pizza for BTC and get rich? YES Too late to parlay a one time $1,000 investment into an early retirement? YES Too late to DCA into an asset that will substantially beat the S&P 500 over the next 10 years? Nope, not at all! The lottery ticket days are LONG gone but Bitcoin has a very good probability of being a huge out performer over the next decade. If you look at a typical regression model for the "fair value" of Bitcoin and extrapolate it out over the next year, you are looking at a CAGR of about 40%-50% and it stays deep in the double digits for a long time. I don't know about you, but I don't have too many alternatives where I can reasonably expect that kind of performance. At some point, Bitcoin will reach a point of maturity where you only get a few percent per year tops. Yes, at that point it will be too late. It's not too late in 2025.

Nick700

Sad thing is that I actually tried to CPU mine it back then for like a week, got nothing but still have access to the empty wallet

Charming-Designer944

A node costs mainly in storage if you want to run a full node. A pruned relay node can get away with very modest requirements. But also have limited use as it is not keeping the history and you cannot use it to look up past transactions. A minimum specification for a full node is Some CPU. 16GB RAM 1 TB of storage Minimum recommended configuration Dual core CPU 32GB RAM 2 TB of storage A pruned node can get away with maybe 25 GB storage You really want at least 32GB RAM, at least during the initial download of the Blockchain or if you need to reindex the Blockchain.

yeb_timothous

The network uses a gossip protocol for communication between nodes. To reduce the risk of miner centralization, I started off with a few nodes run by myself and some friends, using both GPU and CPU mining. ASICs aren’t supported yet, at least not until the network becomes more decentralized. I’ve built this into the consensus logic so that ASICs will only be enabled automatically after the first halving. This approach helps keep the network fair and balanced in its early stages.

Aussiehash

You want 8GB or RAM and at least 1.5TB SSD storage. You can do this on a Raspberry Pi4B or Pi5, so CPU is not a huge issue

MyOtherAcctsAPorsche

I first heard of bitcoin when it was like $9, I remember downloading a CPU miner and did the math, and it would only make me like $0,3 per day so I dropped it then. Then I got for real into crypto when BTC first reached $60+ (I remember because a friend and I put together a miner with sapphire HD 7970 cards, and it started mining when btc was 109). I had actually been following btc for a while before then, but I have no idea on dates. It's true that back then projects aimed at having an utility, stuff like LTC, etc. Now it feels more like memes.... but the people who do memecoins are just a subgroup gambling against eachother, with maybe a newcomer here and there. I don't consider them really part of the same groups as the poeple who work/invest in stuff like btc, eth, and other projects that at least aim to provide a useful service.

ingolius

How much is PC there? Like how can u guys afford PC with good GPU/CPU, doubt companies will sell for less than in EU/USA or rest of the world?

cryptOwOcurrency

Does the old hardware not have enough memory or something? That’s the only resource I can imagine it being constrained on. Even if the quantum resistant algo is CPU-heavy, worst case you’d be waiting five seconds for it to sign and send your transaction, right?

ColdOverYonder

How is this a new revelation? Crypto has been a casino pretty much since the beginning. You don’t remember mining it on your CPU in shared pools when it was worth nothing but a potential twinkle in your eye? Come on now.

Yorn2

Yeah, he was one of the first. Him and Artforz both were GPU mining when essentially no one else was. I think Laszlo made the very first GPU miner in April-June 2010. Then there was a Slashdot post about Bitcoin that was popular around that time and Artforz came over and did mass GPU mining for the first time around July 2010. You could still CPU mine, it's just that the GPU miners were making bank (of course, at the time each coin was only worth ~$0.10. After that, there was a short period of proprietary GPU mining but by October 2010 there was a miner that was completely open source. It wasn't highly optimized, so the other GPU miners still beat it for a while, but very very quickly open source miners caught up. Today, CGMiner is probably the most optimized and oldest miner. Also important to note is that pooled mining was in place by December 2010 and that very similarly broke the strangehold that private GPU miners had in the early-to-mid 2010 era. By the end of the year, anyone that wanted to GPU mine was already mining and a lot of them were pooling as well, thereby beating the efficiency of the other miners. IMHO, this was probably the best era to have gotten into Bitcoin (and when I started!) because mining was accessible to technically-inclined people but still cheap and difficult enough to mine that not everyone wanted to do it.

Ok-Foot7577

I’m just bullshitting. I am one of the sob stories of a guy that did buy it not knowing what it was, and threw away my CPU that had some on it. I could’ve been very well off but alas I am not. I still remember the day I did. I was 22 living at home just bought a new CPU and one of the first news articles I read was about a new digit is currency and I was like oh that’s cool. Bought 50 bucks worth on pay pal when it was .03, moved out of my parents 5 years later and tossed the CPU in the trash. Woe is me.

SnowImportant4517

Very nice ! That PI is chilling at 2.4% CPU those are rookie numbers, Learn "self-hosted" you'll love it ! PS: I know It's worthless to use the PI as a miner

vamos1212

I don't know much about Bitcoin or AI but a few lines in there give me pause. "As long as honest nodes control the most CPU power they can generate the longest chain and outpace any attackers" So then if AI were to recruit and unify CPU power then it could outpace the honest nodes and gain financial control?

OneRobotBoii

No it isn’t. The point is FOMO. Most blockchains that matter (read not dogshitcoins) already support quantum resistant cryptography or are a fork away from it. Encryption algorithms are a dime a dozen, both CPU and QPU ones. The quantum threat is nowhere near as close as you might think either.

420osrs

Asic is a Application Specific Integrated Circuit.  The sha256 algo is etched in the silicon and shoving electricity down the board runs the algo.  This will be faster than the fastest GPU, even a h100. It's not even a comparison. It's like the difference between CPU and GPU for LLMs is the difference between GPU and ASIC for mining. There's basically no overlap with the fastest CPU in the world and a budget gaming gpu from 10 years ago in terms of LLM performance. It's far more worrisome that two of the pools are US-based and the government could just tell them to collude. 

TaxGrand9157

Dude youre CALLING HIM IGNORANT AF? How the fuck does running a node NOT use electricity lol. Aww sweet summer child, when your CPU processes things, it uses electricity. When hard drives read or write they use electricity. When you turn a computer off, it stops using electricity.

HappyGick

Blockchain itself has proven to be pretty reliable. The idea is good. The only weak point is, as has been pointed out, the means of authentication and transport. One could use hardware cryptography for that part. But I cannot think of any reliable means of making sure that only camera pictures and videos can be signed. Software based techniques would definitely fail. Maybe making the signature on the *raw* image data? Such that everything gets signed before it even gets to the device. But then you cannot include any post-processing enhancements, and it significantly increases the latency between the camera and the device CPU, even if using hardware cryptography chips. It also presents a huge problem with JPEG and lossy compression, because even if the image was not altered, saving in JPEG alone outputs an entirely different image because of the compression. I love the idea but I just cannot figure out how to preven spoofing.

invalidbehaviour

Yep. Almost nobody had "racks of servers" mining bitcoin in 2010. A single desktop grade CPU would have been more than sufficient. The 10k pizza transaction took place in 2010, for context. Even in 2011, I was mining with a pair of HD6970s, consuming about 5KWh/day. Why anyone would have a system consuming 10x this power in 2010 is beyond me.

Ltsmba

There was a very short time when mining bitcoin on a CPU at home was "the big thing". It didnt last very long, you had to be there at the exact right moment. Then there was a very short time where mining ethereum, or other alt coins on GPUs was profitable. Again you had to be there, and thats over now. Mining on an individual level is pretty much dead now, unless you somehow have access to free or nearly free electricity, and even then its high-risk gambling that you'll see an ROI on your equipment. The big thing now is stacking sats. Fortunately, the window is not closed yet, and it seems like its going to remain open for some time. MOST people still dont understand or know what bitcoin is/will become.

This_Maintenance_834

ASIC was out in 2013. That was after FPGA obliterated GPU mining. CPU mining was far gone even much earlier. By 2012 FPGA had dominated the mining. In 2014 GPU mining was marginally profitable on shitcoins. The best case scenario was OP mined on some shitcoin pools and forgot cashed out. Vaguely recall most mining pool required manual cash out at that time. Multicoin pool was invented in mid 2014. Before that shitcoin pools pay out in native shitcoins, not BTC.

FootballRemote4595

I think it was $13 when I started I still don't own any of it outside of what I personally mind on my CPU back when GPU mining was first becoming a thing... I don't regret it. Who's going to speculate on what was a toy currency that people are spending 50,000 or whatever Bitcoin on a pizza

cohortq

I used to think the CPU cycles when mining for bitcoin were going to help find a cure for cancer just like the Folding@home project.

SalteeKibosh

I've been mining for years now. ASICs, GPUs, and FPGAs and even mined Helium. When I started, you could use your gaming PC GPU/CPU to make some actual money. For example, your 1070ti was pulling in $5-7/day on ETH near peak profit. This was well before companies started building warehouses for tens of thousands of GPUs and ASICs to run as a competitor to someone like you. Nowadays, as soon as something profitable to mine is developed, these companies move all those resources to mine as much as they can. As you're probably aware, the more resources on a project, the less each resource makes in revenue and profit. Now, your 1070 is not 1 generation behind, not 2, not 3, but is 4 generations behind. You can not compete against industrial miners with 5090s, h100s, fleets of asics, and fpgas. It's not possible. Unfortunately, you aren't going to make anything worth the effort. Even with a 5090, profit is in the negatives to a few pennies profit per day (on $0.08/kwh power rate) Your best bet in this industry is to work hard at something you're good at, make excess money, and invest that into BTC, ETH, or other bluechip coins. Do not buy memecoins or shitcoins and expect profit. Good luck

zuptar

I had been playing with other 'make money with your cpu' applications in uni around 2007. Anyhow, by the time bitcoin came around I stumbleupon'ed the paper pretty much as it came out. Instead of reading it in depth, I stupidly just skimmed it, thought it would just be a waste of CPU and moved on. Created my first paper wallet when price was around $1-2, but I have no idea if I ever loaded it with any, maybe I mined for a day. I was very put off by not having any way to buy or sell it. I'm pretty sure I would have used that 5btc faucet when it was around. Years later in 2014 I open a mtgox account 2 days before it gets hacked, so that puts me off. 2017, oh, there's some kind of block wars. Order myself a ledger, open a brokerage account and feel safe enough to self custody. Point I'm making is that, the reason most people didn't get into it when it was cheap is not the lack of interest in the tech, it's the lack of vision to understand how lucrative it could be, combined with the lack of feeling like its safe. Obviously those issues are mostly squashed now.

DeDorp

I use Tari and it works perfectly fine for me — no issues at all. I don’t use the Tari Universe application though; instead, I transfer my XTM through a different site. On average, I earn around 200 XTM per day on my GPU and about 10 XTM per day on my CPU. I usually keep it running while I’m working, turn it off when I’m home, and then turn it back on before going to sleep. For me, it’s worth it since I’m not spending any money. I transfer everything over to ETM, and it’s been working great.

1HOTelcORALesSEX1

CPU back in the day!

AutoModerator

Post is by: Cheap_Tension4616 and the url/text [ ](https://goo.gl/GP6ppk)is: /r/CryptoMarkets/comments/1nlpw6y/bless_network_the_500b_cloud_disruptor_bless/ 🚀 BLESS Network: The Decentralized Computing Powerhouse Challenging Cloud Monopolies | $BLESS Token primed for major exchange listings Project Overview: The Decentralized Cloud Revolution BLESS Network (formerly Blockless) is a decentralized physical infrastructure network (DePIN) that harnesses idle computing resources from millions of devices worldwide via a simple browser extension. Unlike traditional centralized cloud providers (AWS, Google Cloud), BLESS creates a globally distributed edge computing network that offers 90% lower costs while maintaining enterprise-grade performance for AI, rendering, and dApp services. With a fixed supply of 10 billion $BLESS tokens and a robust tokenomics model designed for deflationary pressure, BLESS aims to disrupt the $500B cloud computing market. Technology & Mechanism: How BLESS Works Decentralized Compute Infrastructure Browser-Based Nodes: Users install a lightweight browser extension (Chrome/Firefox/Kiwi) to contribute idle CPU/GPU resources. Dynamic Task Matching: AI-powered allocation system assigns workloads based on device capabilities (smartphones to servers). Secure Execution: WebAssembly (WASM) runtime ensures isolated, malicious-proof task processing. Cross-Chain Compatibility: Native support for Solana, Ethereum, and Celestia. Protocol Economic Loop 90% Revenue Buyback & Burn: Protocol revenue from compute sales is used to buy back and burn $BLESS, creating deflationary pressure. Staking Mechanics: Node operators stake $BLESS to increase workload capacity and earn rewards. Slashing Conditions: Malicious node behavior results in stake slashing, ensuring network integrity. Table: BLESS Token Utility & Distribution Aspect Details Total Supply- 10 billion $BLESS (fixed) TIME Token- 100M/epoch testnet reward (burned at redemption) Revenue Split-90% buyback/burn, 10% treasury Staking Required for node workload capacity + rewards Governance-Future protocol parameter control Team & Backing: Seasoned Experts Driving Innovation Core Leadership Butian Li (CEO): NGC Ventures alumni, blockchain infrastructure specialist. Derek Anderson (CTO): Former Akash Network lead, decentralized compute architect. Michael Chen (COO): Ex-Binance Labs researcher, tokenomics design. Liam Zhang (CPO): Product strategist with Web3 scaling expertise. Funding & Partnerships $8M Raised: $3M pre-seed (NGC Ventures), $5M seed (M31 Capital + Frachtis). Ecosystem Partners: Integrations with Solana, Ethereum, and Celestia ecosystems. Enterprise Clients: AI startups and rendering farms piloting the network. 🌍 Global Presence & Network Growth Main Location: Distributed team with hubs in Singapore, San Francisco, and Berlin. Testnet Momentum: 5M+ registered nodes via browser extension. Mainnet Launch this september 📈 Market Position: Challenging Centralized Cloud Monopolies Cost & Efficiency Advantages Metric BLESS Network AWS / Google Cloud Cost~90% lower Premium pricing Node Distribution-5M+ global devices Limited data centers User Control Fully decentralized Corporate-controlled Target Market Opportunities AI Compute Demand: Global GPU shortage drives demand for decentralized alternatives. Edge Computing Growth: Projected $250B market by 2030. DePIN Sector Tailwinds: DePIN crypto sector grew 200%+ in 2024. 💱 Potential Exchange Listings & Liquidity Confirmed & Expected Listings Tier 1 Targets: Binance (team ties to Binance Labs), Coinbase (DePIN sector interest). Tier 2 Partnerships: Gate.io, MEXC (active promotions), OKX (Asia focus). DEX Launches: Raydium (Solana), Uniswap (multi-chain expansion). Liquidity Provisions Initial Liquidity: $6M+ planned for launch. Vesting Schedules: Team/investor tokens subject to multi-year locks. --- 🚀 Price Potential & Growth Catalysts Valuation Framework Comparable Projects: Akash Network ($1.2B FDV), Aethir ($430M FDV). Conservative FDV: $500M (early-stage DePIN benchmark). Bull Case FDV: $3B+ (with AI/DePIN adoption surge). 🔮 Price Predictions CoinDataFlow Prediction Forecast range for 2025: $20.35 – $39.80 Forecast for 2029: Up to $86.78 https://coindataflow.com/en/prediction/bless CoinSwitch Projection 2025 Estimate: $21.20 – $46.03 2029 Potential: Up to $100.36 https://coinswitch.co/switch/crypto/bless-network-airdrop X (Twitter) Post Estimated post-TGE price: $20.48 – $45.70, depending on exchange listings and TGE hype https://x.com/BnvNaz65175/status/1957516124800840132 🤝 Notable Partnerships & Ecosystem Expansion Blockchain Integrations: Solana (primary), Ethereum, Celestia. Compute Clients: AI startups, render farms, and dApp developers. Investor Network: NGC Ventures, M31 Capital, MH Ventures. Risks & Challenges Regulatory Uncertainty: Potential SEC security classification. Technical Execution: Mainnet scalability and security proofs. Competition: Akash, Aethir, and centralized providers (AWS, Google). How to Participate Now 1. Install Browser Extension: Run nodes to earn TIME tokens. 2. Maximize Rewards: Enable social boosts (+20%), complete quizzes. 3. Prepare for TGE this september 🎯 Conclusion: Why BLESS Network Is Positioned for Success BLESS Network merges DePIN innovation with explosive AI compute demand, backed by a seasoned team and viral testnet growth. Its tokenomics model (buyback/burn + staking) and low-cost edge computing solution could disrupt centralized cloud oligopolies. With mainnet launch and Tier 1 listings imminent, $BLESS represents a high-potential, high-risk bet on the decentralized infrastructure revolution. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoMarkets) if you have any questions or concerns.*

unthocks

So now the definition of ‘computer’ magically changes depending on your feelings? A hardware wallet literally has a CPU, memory, OS, firmware, and does cryptographic operations. That’s more ‘modern computer’ than your calculator. Stop coping, and buy more bitcoin instead of being loud idiot.

aafonsodias

* **On 51% majority deciding the chain:** *“Proof-of-work is essentially one-CPU-one-vote. The majority decision is represented by the longest chain, which has the greatest proof-of-work effort invested in it.”* (Section 4, Proof-of-Work)

aafonsodias

You’re not entirely right saying I “don’t know.” Both points I made are in the original whitepaper: * **On 51% majority deciding the chain:** *“Proof-of-work is essentially one-CPU-one-vote. The majority decision is represented by the longest chain, which has the greatest proof-of-work effort invested in it.”* (Section 4, Proof-of-Work) * **On further splitting if needed:** Bitcoin already subdivides down to 1 satoshi (1/100,000,000 BTC). While the whitepaper doesn’t fix a final limit, it shows flexibility in transaction structure — *“there is never the need to extract a complete standalone copy of a transaction's history.”* (Section 9, Combining and Splitting Value)bitcoin Satoshi himself later clarified the protocol could support **smaller units** if demand required. So yes, majority hashpower rules the chain, and yes, BTC can be split further if needed.

HueyGTO

Parallax uses Ethash for PoW — there’s a CPU miner bundled in, and GPU mining will be totally viable from day one (lots of existing ETH PoW miners should work fine). The client is already implemented, and right now we’re focused on building traction so as many people as possible can run and mine at launch. Launch date + source code drop will be announced on @prlxchain. The client itself is based on geth, but with Bitcoin’s consensus rules integrated.

SherbetFluffy1867

In the early days of Bitcoin, running a node and mining were synonymous, but that hadn't been true for a very long time. You can mine without a node. Running a node today is useful related to mining only in the fact that you can use it to build your own block templates and use it to broadcast a PoW to the network if one were to be found. There is no "switch" on a node to begin hashing with it. Hashrate significant enough to use for mining Bitcoin would only come from a source utilizing ASICs, not from a CPU or GPU source.

OrangePillar

You can’t mine on a CPU.

CryptoDeepDive

> “A PoW chain could also just mine 90% of the total supply before offering the remaining 10%, like what?” Not really. Bitcoin wasn’t pre-mined — every block was mined publicly from day one. Anyone with a CPU could join. That’s the opposite of allocating 90% up front. The fact people didn’t mine then doesn’t make it unfair — it makes it early. > “Satoshi also mined an insane amount of BTC on some shit CPU right? He spent a meaningless amount of energy on creating it.” He mined under the same rules as everyone else. The early energy cost was low because difficulty was low. That’s how bootstrapping works. But it was still bound by the same open, energy based process as today. POS on the other hand distribution is often arbitrary or insider-heavy from the start. > “POS also requires real energy and real computation to function, right? Your energy argument makes no sense.” In POW, energy is the ongoing cost of security. Attacks require continuous, massive energy burn — it’s not recoverable. In POS, the “cost” is a one-time purchase of coins. Once you have them, you wield influence forever. Many times you don't even need to.spend anything to buy the coins. You just give them to yourself as a founder > “Holding the majority of the supply doesn’t let you dictate how the network functions lol.” POS gives whales structural control. If a small group of custodians or funds hold the majority, they dictate upgrades and censorship. In POW, no miner, no matter how big, can unilaterally change the rules — they can only propose blocks that the rest of the network either accepts or rejects. > “A 51% attack is the same in PoW and PoS.” Not true. In POW, you rent or build hashpower, and you bleed money every second you attack. Once you stop paying, the attack ends. In POS, if you ever reach 51% ownership, you own the network indefinitely. That’s a permanent capture, not a temporary risk. > “Security being independent from the coin is bad because attackers can just break any network they want without losing their entire investment.” It’s actually a strength. In POW, security isn’t hostage to bagholders. It is an open competition for energy. Attacking requires burning real-world resources, not just shuffling balances on a ledger. In POS, the richest automatically secure their control, and nothing stops exchanges holding user deposits from controlling consensus. The entire point at the end is that you are utterly wrong when claiming they are the same.

XysterU

This fictitious coin stuff is superfluous and has nothing to do with what we're talking about. A PoW chain could also just mine 90% of the total supply before offering the remaining 10%, like what? You do understand that Satoshi also mined an insane amount of BTC on some shit cpu right? He spent a meaningless amount of energy on creating it. You also understand that PoS also requires real energy and real computation to function, right? Your energy argument makes no sense. It's like you're saying the first Bitcoin mined has 99% less value than Bitcoin mined today because the BTC mined today requires 99% more energy to produce. Is that what you think? Holding the majority of the supply doesn't let you dictate how the network functions lol. You don't just pay X amount to increase block sizes. With a majority supply you could start acting maliciously, but this would just cause the value of the coin to crash and the network to split. You need to understand that just like BTC, other networks operate using software that sets the network parameters. By running the software, people are signalling their agreement with the parameters in that software. Holding a majority supply doesn't let you change how the network functions. And even if it did (it doesn't) you would need the entire network to agree to run with your new parameters. Someone holding a majority of funds is just a 51% attack just like it is in PoW when someone holds 51% of mining power. Also you're not justifying why netowork security being independent from the coin is a good thing? Is there better security as a result? Then how come Monero got close to being 51% attacked? The funny thing is that the 51% attack on Monero didn't require the attackers to buy Monero (thus driving the cost up, making it progressively harder to acquire the 51%). It also meant that the attackers didn't have to own a bunch of Monero that would then plummet in value once their attack succeeded. They literally just rolled up with a shit ton of additional CPU compute to destroy a coin that they don't care about (idk what their motives were). In this case the separation of security from the coin is bad because attackers can just break any network they want without losing the entirety of their investment in the attack. They bought CPU power but they can re-use it on other attacks or they can re-sell the CPUs. If monero was PoS, they'd need to buy 51% of the monero supply and then have their entire supply become worthless, losing their entire investment.

TheGreatMuffin

> if the hash rate goes up, that mean more miners or more powerful mining hardware, right? Yep > And do we know what share of total global computing power Bitcoin mining represents? It's not really comparable to "global computing power", as there is nothing being computed in bitcoin mining. It's more like a super dumb (but super efficient) guessing hardware running, it's not like your general CPU or GPU hardware. You can't do anything else with a bitcoin mining chip (ASIC) except mining bitcoin.

Dangerous_Boot_3870

Moore's law applies to CPU which are in every gaming console. It has nothing to do with flops or transistors.

xte2

Yes, at certain levels we are forced to show our hand, so for example, there aren't Gaddafi's billions disappearing from Belgian and Luxembourgish banks with no one (except very few) knowing anything; there isn't fractional reserve banking with which banks milk private wealth by creating money through loans. It's freer, but it's also tied to an IT infrastructure that is concretely less and less free: today the motherboard's EFI phone home, the CPU runs a small internal OS, and this is on PCs. If we extend to mobile, we have, shall we say, theoretical "freedom" on an OS that isn't free (because even Android isn't AOSP), so it's an "institutional" freedom but at the population level it's always illusory. Only if we impose universal open hardware and FLOSS, making it forbidden to sell non-open hardware, non-free and public software from the first commit to allow a community to form and oversee every project of interest, we can have substantial freedom. Today, Big Tech is clearly visible in cars. We buy a car, we are formal owners, but it can be blocked, its software, or nervous system, modified (updated) remotely behind our backs, and we don't have superior, more privileged access than the vendor. The car isn't truly ours. This, for me, must be very clear to everyone to avoid going from bad to worse.

StromGames

Yes. Decentralization is great. But a Mac mining is nothing. Not even a rounding error, compared to the current network hash rate. Bitcoin network (Sept 2025): ~600 EH/s 600 EH/s = 600,000,000,000,000,000,000 hashes/s (6 × 10^20) High-end Mac (CPU/GPU mining): ~5 MH/s 5 MH/s = 5,000,000 hashes/s (5 × 10^6) Difference: (6 × 10^20) ÷ (5 × 10^6) = 1.2 × 10^14 = The Bitcoin network is about 120,000,000,000,000 times faster than a Mac. Effectively 0.

Scary-Track493

Mining BTC solo on a Mac is basically like scratching a lottery ticket with a toothpick. You technically *can*, but you’ll never get anywhere. Modern Bitcoin mining is done with specialized ASICs that are millions of times faster than your Mac’s CPU or any GPUs.

DiamondHandsDarrell

From my understanding that's not what quantum computing is for or useful for. You can't just load up a miner app and let it run. It's not like comparing it to being a faster CPU/GPU/ASIC. It's purpose and use is for entirely different use cases. Just thinking out loud here, but it could be that mining pools are a bigger threat due to solo miners no longer being able to compete. The more solo miners there are, the more decentralized it is and the more difficult it is to shut the network down. The more centralized pools become, say eventually 10, the easier it gets to shut it down such as was done with the Pirate Bay when they were moving servers all over the place.

Objective_Digit

> Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System Abstract A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution. None of that precludes Bitcoin from being digital gold. And since you are fond of quoting from the white paper: >The steady addition of a constant of amount of new coins is analogous to gold miners expending resources to add gold to circulation. In our case, it is CPU time and electricity that is expended. Again, why do you think the creation of new coins is called mining and not minting or printing? Why have a limited supply? Why have a diminishing reward akin to gold mining becoming harder?