CPU

Prestigious_Owl4418

As Ex Nokia, i did believed in comeback, its too late for Nokia, since they lost there Mot after phone business it really hard to comeback for Nokia in cunsumer business, they telecom network OEM business is getting ripped off with Ericsson, and Huawei. (AT&T US is already swapping NOKIA RAN with Ericsson). In Cloud RAN Nokia faced huge power utilization and over heat components problem thanks to Intel CPU!. While other Vendor are adopting AMD Chips (XILINX) FPGAs which are far superior to Intel. So, sell NOKIA, and Buy AMD stock, along with BTC.

AbjectFee5982

We're literally carrying a tracking device with us at all time, sharing our entire life on social media. BWAHAHA.. That's cute... Let's try this again Hey even if you left your phone at home... Businesses can use Beacon to track your every movement... Beacons are small, wireless transmitters that use low-energy Bluetooth technology to send signals to other smart devices nearby. They are one of the latest developments in location technology and proximity marketing. Put simply, they connect and transmit information to smart devices making location-based searching and interaction easier and more accurate. The beacon device itself is incredibly simple. Each device contains a CPU, radio, and batteries, and it works by repeatedly broadcasting out an identifier. This identifier is picked up by your device, usually a mobile, and marks out an important place in your environment. The identifier is a unique ID number that your smartphone recognizes as unique to the beacon. Once connected, the beacon will carry out whatever function it has been programmed to perform. We will go into more detail later on some of the many functions beacon can carry out. Except you left your phone at home and still paid with cash right? Wrong, NFC’s RFID band is rated for 1m transmission range, though that’s only based on the RFID standard. The NFC standard is rated for 10cm maximum, and okay, with a better antenna, you might get 20cm. That’s a feature, not a bug. NFC was leveraging off the existing RFID specs, but it was intentionally not designed for long range, but basically contact-range, as form of security. All it needs is 3 ft to passively read your credit card and Pull everything up on you. No phone needed.. But wait there's More The option that generated the most agreement was that people would like to keep some purchases private by using cash: 72 percent of our respondents either somewhat or strongly agreed with this statement. This shows that nearly three-quarters of Americans are at least somewhat concerned about their privacy and aware that anytime they use a credit card, debit card, check, or mobile payment service a variety of businesses record the purchase in laundry pen. (And this is *far* from the only indication [from our work at the Center](https://www.digitalcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/2017-Digital-Future-Report.pdf) that Americans are worried about privacy.) [https://www.digitalcenter.org/columns/cash-and-anonymity/](https://www.digitalcenter.org/columns/cash-and-anonymity/)

CrazyAppel

It's not centralized and the whole reason Solana is scam-ridden is because it's not centralized lmao. The argument for it being centralized is that it's expensive to run a validator node (you need 256gigs of RAM and at least a Cooperlake Xeon CPU), but a lot of people understand things backwards. Solana uses PoH, mainly built by Anatoly, his whole idea was to have the lowest block times and the fastest transaction speeds, resulting in high node costs. By abusing these metrics, you can build stuff like bundlers that can buy your own coin from a bunch of different wallets at the same time when your coin is created. It tricks newbies into thinking your coin is active, you can easily sell all supply after with a single press of a button. Creating a rugpull coin costs you like 100 bucks max and a few hours of your time, THAT is why this chain is so scam ridden. The product is actually good though, PoH is a handcrafted and masterfully coded piece of artwork by mostly one person. All good things end up being abused hardcore

riscten

A small quantity? Back in 2010 people could easily CPU-mine 250 BTC _a day_ with a Pentium.

Trilzerobyte

Do you just want to run Bitcoin Core, or also Lightning, Electrum server, a web UI, block explorer?  If just Bitcoin Core then you may get away with 2GB RAM. But what CPU do you have? Do you want to verify all the blocks from the genesis? Many NASes are low powered ARM servers. If it's equivalent to a RPi 3, it'll take nearly a month to sync the blockchain. If you don't need to verify old blocks, then you can copy the block data from another machine you trust. Once caught up to latest block, you only need to verify one block per 10 minutes on average so it's easier to stay caught up than to initially sync.

Harucifer

>Cryptocurency is the start of Decentralised Money It's not really. Bitcoin is centralized in the hands of few who either were early or have/had a lot of money to invest in it. People being born today, for instance, will never have a chance to own a nice chunk unless they inherit money to buy it. Not to mention fees going up and up and up with price and "usage", it just makes Bitcoin not practical for pretty much anything. Oh, and don't forget miner centralization. People can't mine in their CPU/GPU's anymore, only "mining farm operations" are able to mine properly. This is as far from decentralized as you can be.

Slartibartfastfour20

Some azure instances, to hammer small cap CPU PoW coins too.

TheGreatMuffin

Sure, some notes: 1) if we take the wording of the white paper very close to the heart (which we definitely shouldn't, as the white paper is not precise enough to be a guiding blueprint of how bitcoin *should* work; it doesn't even describe how bitcoin *does* work: it leaves out fundamentals like the 21m coin limit and does not predict other technical developments like the separation of nodes from miners), we might notice that it says "CPU", not "1 person = 1 vote". How would you prevent or disincentivize a person using multiple CPUs, or even a CPU farm (not that bitcoin is mined with CPUs anymore, but whatever)? In contrast, the way bitcoin is set up (miners earning new coins/tx fees) is incentivizing miners to max out their capabilities. 2) There is no vote in any strict sense anywhere on bitcoin. Sure, you could make a point that the hashrate is kinda voting on which transactions happened and which have not, but it's not a democratic rule of which transaction is valid or not (the validation can be performed by anyone individually with their own full node), and neither it is a vote on the rules of the network. Read up on what happened during the attempt of majority of hashrate to change the rules of the network against the will of the users: [Segwit2x]. All that said, having the majority of hashpower concentrated in a certain geographic or jurisdictional location, or under control of a handful of market-traded corporations, is obviously not ideal and should be a thing to criticize. However, it is IMO wrong to say that it is against "Satoshi's vision" somehow, because there is no such thing in the first place, and if I personally were forced to interpret whatever he said and coded, I wouldn't see anything in Bitcoin being fundamentally against this vision today (not saying that everything is perfect and flawless, ofc).

TheGreatMuffin

> original vision of 1 CPU = 1 Vote. I sense a potential misunderstanding here.. what is being voted on, in your understanding? And what is the "original vision"

Reclaimer2401

Using general purpose computing for consensus is possible, and could make PoW more sustainable for a chain by issuing compute to a distributed network, yes. This will -never- be implemented on an existing chain that uses asics because asics cannot do this. an Asic can only perform the algorithm it was designed for. A chain using CPU or GPUs to mine could do this, but the next issue is marketing the compute. If you could find a market for that compute then sure, it could work. AI training / machine learning is viable, but the issue here is requiring much more complex set up for nodes, as well as a requirement for extremely large ram requirements for said cards, furthermore, due to the lack of privacy and security, it would be difficult to find clients wanting to train small AIs as the primary use case would likely be training with proprietary data, which would not be viable for a decentralised system. So, the idea is possible and many have made some attempts at it but no one has put something forward that is actually viable or found a market for it.

MzCWzL

Bet your disk usage is 100% which means your CPU is waiting on disk

Temporary_Pen_1692

And CPU utilization never exceed 40%? my CPU can go to 4.5Ghz

Temporary_Pen_1692

But both of my CPU and RAM are at low position..... I think software doesn't really maximally utilize the resources

ta_pi

One variable I found important in downloading the full blockchain was RAM. Not CPU. Not bandwidth. If you don't have enough RAM you'll be swapping to disk so much it will seem like the bandwidth is the bottleneck. Check what your machine is doing, mine with 4Gb initially was working the HDD _hard_.

monerobull

For complete beginners: Coinbase Look up what a limit order is, you don't want to just click on the big "buy" button because that is how you pay $10 in fees instead of 20 cents. Read the bitcoin whitepaper, it is actually a pretty good introduction to explain the general idea of how this stuff works and isn't THAT long. If you want to experiment with mining, you can try mining Monero with just a regular CPU, you won't make more than a few cents per day though. Play to earn games are a waste of time, you will make 10 times as much with a regular job and they are not really fun. Airdrop hunting is how you get scammed by going to one wrong website. Most of the time it's not really worth it anyways. Faucets used to be a thing in the past, not really anymore.

raj6126

What classifies you as a miner 1 GPU or CPU mining coin.

rgnet1

“It’s a small speculator’s market.” You’re saying what you believe it IS but Facebook is just a dude posting info about his day until more people join and do the same thing. Then Facebook is an invaluable communications tool that the entire globe uses and also replaced other systems with. The network is everything. If Satoshi had posted the bitcoin code and no one else ran it then he’s just a dude burning his CPU to make worthless unique digital tokens. But when others join and agree that the work expended is proof of scarcity and a valid way to store value, you have a network. When two free entitities adopt it as currency (i.e. two private citizens or businesses agree to exchange bitcoin for a good or service), then Bitcoin IS objectively a currency. It can be used this way today. Some entities do. Nothing is preventing anyone adopting it (and adoption has steadily increased since its inception). So no, Bitcoin is not solely a “speculator’s market”. Some people use it that way, but it was neither its creator’s intention nor the only use.

GeeEyeDoe

Difficulty will always be relatable to the rewards gained from mining a block. If rewards drop then difficulty drops. If difficulty drops enough, users could CPU or GPU mine cheaply for a profit. This would lead to even more decentralization as more individuals start mining and less centralized companies are mining as a total percentage of hash power.

fluffyponyza

Both! Half the hashrate is CPU-bound, as it uses RandomX and is merge-mined with Monero. The other half uses double-SHA3, which is GPU-optimized right now - but I'd expect that within the next few years that will be replaced by ASICs as it becomes commercially viable. SHA3 is specifically designed to be easy to ASIC, which is why we chose it as the hash function for that second half of the hashrate. There's a full Linux Minotari suite that includes a miner and everything else you need: https://tari.com/downloads/

naveenspark

Great question! Two key elements of Tari are intended to help prevent centralization and mining from becoming industrialized: 1. RandomX - Tari has a hybrid mining setup: 50% of blocks are mined using SHA3, and 50% are mined using RandomX. RandomX is an ASIC-resistant hashing algorithm that is CPU-optimized. The ASIC-resistant properties of RandomX make it a great algorithm for home CPUs. We hope that using RandomX will make home mining fun and worthwhile for a long period after the mainnet launch. People can still buy large quantities of servers of course, but they will be buying CPUs vs. ASICs. 2. p2pool - Tari Universe has a native p2pool implementation. P2pool is a decentralized pool system with no central operator and no fees. By building p2pool in from day 1, we believe the majority of miners will use it. The result is no miner centralization, and better rewards for miners then using traditional pools.

John_Pig

I've developed one similar but used a quantum CPU that gives Bitcoin price in the future, don't know when and why it's given not in fiat reference but in cheese pizzas but I like it, it's 1 sat one pizza and doesn't change.

LargeSnorlax

Well first, any cloud miner is a scam in general - If anything offers to "mine on the cloud" then you are being scammed, especially if it's on your phone, or an app on the app store. You can't mine anything by watching adds, or purchase computational power to mine anything because that's not how mining works. You can mine Bitcoin with ASICs (The only type of device with enough theoretical power to hit a Bitcoin block) such as [Bitmain's devices](https://m.bitmain.com/) or you can use your CPU/GPU devices to mine either by yourself (not the same as this scam app) or through a mining pool, mining things like QRL or KASPA. You will need a powerful graphics card or CPU to achieve anything worthwhile, and odds are your electrical bill will cost more than whatever you get mining.

analogOnly

The fact that there was so much interest early on means it's likely more people were CPU mining earlier.

SmoothGoing

Not a mac user but did you get the right CPU file? x86 vs ARM based M CPUs.

analogOnly

You don't need a lot of ram or CPU power for a node. You need storage capacity. I think like a 5tb drive should be pretty future proof. It's currently only 598.26Gb

trimalcus

Using existing computer to mine XMR with a cpu only is more cost efficient because you don't need to invest anything. However the power input is limited It will only save you around 10 to 30 dollars per month per CPU

trimalcus

Better mine XMR with existing rig with a CPU. I do that with 2 computers and a NAS in my living room. Oversized air cooled exchanger. Just give me some extra heat without using all my eletrical heaters As long as you don't need to invest money it is OK. If not : better use the money for better heating appliance like heat pump etc...

Pentahydroxyhexanal

I have a wallet that is 'mostly cold' (proper cold is a computer that can't talk to the internet). The machine it is on does talk to the internet, but the wallet might only be opened once every few months to sync with the full node I'm running. That wallet is configured to only talk to my local node, and ends up syncing as fast as my CPU can handle because of LAN speeds. That wallet also runs in pruned mode. So, I don't build wallet support into the node, because the wallet runs elsewhere and uses the full node as it's trusted data source. I've never heard of umbrel/start9/etc. But I'm also the sort of lunatic who learned how to install and configure Openstack by hand, rather than use something 'simple' like packstack. So...if you're after noob-friendly, I'm the wrong guy. :p Note: Openstack is a completely different project that is not in the crypto space at all. It was (at the time, if not currently) monstrously complicated to get working in a full setup. The advantage of a pruned node is reduced disk space needs. Instead of needing ~800GB for the full blockchain, you'd only need, say, 10GB (the chainstate DB will always take up a few GB, but you can configure the prune to only keep the, say, last 4GB of blocks). I should explain that. A bitcoin wallet has two databases. * It has the blockchain database, which contains all the data for every block (unless in pruned mode) that was ever mined. * It contains the chainstate DB, which is a database of which blocks contain transactions relevant to the address(es) inside the wallet. And some other misc metadata I'm not too knowledgeable about. The chainstate DB will be 2-3GB last time I checked, and you can't make it smaller. It is vital to wallet operations. If it gets deleted, it can be rebuilt (assuming you still have your wallet file), but rebuilding it requires re-scanning the entire blockchain. On a pruned mode node, that means re-downloading and processing the entire blockchain again. On a full node, that means re-reading all the blocks from disk and processing them again (just a read operation + math). Because even a pruned mode-node read every block at one point in time, it is no less secure than a full node. There are theoretical attacks that you could *maybe* pull off where you corrupt the chainstate DB in a way that couldn't be done with a full blockchain, but nobody's proven those out and it's unlikely they ever will. As stated, the only real 'reason' for pruned mode is to save disk space. Running a full node is about being useful to others. Hosting a full copy of the blockchain for others to download (because I have good internet) and keeping a full copy for myself in case my wallet needs to re-scan it for whatever reason. I like to tinker, so I ended up re-creating my chainstate DB like 10x. The average user probably won't ever need that. I also, personally, sleep better at night knowing I have all the blocks to refer to, and don't have to trust computed intermediates in the chainstate DB. But that's mostly a placebo, I suspect, rather than a real benefit. Archive Node / blockchain explorer: https://blockchair.com/ is one of many examples. You can type in any address, transaction ID, etc, and get information about it. When people say "X address has 100,000 BTC" that's how they know. Basically, on an archive node, the blocks are exploded out in such a way that you can search by any field within them, rather than being condensed down to the bare minimum information needed for the bitcoin network/wallets to operate. As I said, unless you have a specific need, this is not something you should worry about. But I did want you to understand what it is and why it exists.

TheSmegger

I've been racking my grey matter but just can't recall. I know Nicehash was popular but I don't think I used that. I can tell you it didn't have a GUI, and used both the video card(ati at the time I think) and CPU. Dammit, I can't even remember the name of the Australian mining pool I used...

infii123

What about the blocks in the beginning when CPU and GPU were still used? Oo

Calius1337

Same here. I’ve been into BTC from the early days. I’ve had the privilege to experience that you could mine 50 BTC blocks with your CPU. Whenever I could pay with BTC, I did. Remember when you could pay Steam in BTC for your games? Yeah did that. A lot. In the end I’ve spent everything but I regret nothing. BTC are meant to be used. It is money, after all.

Yorn2

Yes, both of them were early GPU miners. Laszlo even emailed Satoshi about it and they both agreed he should do something with the coin he had acquired in order to generate interest. This is sort of how the pizza stuff started. Prior to that, everyone was CPU mining and it was a mostly even distribution. Artforz I think spent most of his early coin on Wikileaks donations and bad trades on MtGox. Some of the early CPU miners, notably |)ruid, mostly sold huge amounts of their early coin in 2011 during the first big Bitcoin bubble. As all that early coin was spent on pizzas, faucets, and bad trades, it democratized Bitcoin ownership among some of the second wave miners/enthusiasts during the November 2010 to November 2011 period. It was basically a huge bubble and then bursting of that bubble as the price went from like $0.10 to over $20 and then fell all the way back down to ~$2. It was a wild time to be involved back then. Bitcoin had first been mentioned as a solution to the funding of Wikileaks when the credit card companies had stopped processing donations to them in late 2010, and Bitcoin was declared "dead" by Wired" in late 2011.

Archophob

If you have a significant portion of your networth in BTC, you don't want to suffer from an FTX or MtGox event. Not your keys, not your coins. So, you want to store them in a wallet where you have the private key and not some exchange. But, do you want to store them unencrypted on your PC, like the BitcoinCore client did in the early days of CPU mining in the wallet.dat? You're fine as long as nobody else has access to this file, but who knows if some malware on your compute might do nothing suspicios besides looking for this file and sending the keys to it's C&C server? It might stay under the radar of antivirus programs if it doesn't do any other damage. So, having the keys on separate hardware is a safety feature.

Desperate-Barnacle-4

Pointless waste of money and energy. You can learn about Bitcoin mining by reading Mastering Bitcoin (open source too https://github.com/bitcoinbook/bitcoinbook/) Each USB stick "mines" at 53,000h/s. Compared to one CPU core on my i7 hashing at 5,000,000h/s. Or my GPU at 400,000,000h/s. All of these are too slow to even get a single share on a mining pool. No point mining if you have less than 100,000,000,000,000h/s IMO like a single modern ASIC

LooCfur

I don't think I ever used the bitcoin faucet. However, I do recall installing bitcoin software onto my computer back when bitcoin was mined with our CPUs. It hogged my internet connection, and ran my CPU at 100%. I decided it might be a virus and got rid of it. Later I figured out what bitcoin really was, and I bought 10 at less than $10/each to sit on. I realized it could be a big deal some day. Alas, I sold them at $400 and never bought more. I'm not so sure bitcoin is here to stay - unlike what most people think right now. Mainly, I stay away from it because it's just so darn wasteful. There are better cryptocurrencies out there.

itsybitsybtc

This is great, I haven't seen this before and it's easy to understand. Here it is in text in case anyone wants to copy it. >The Byzantine Generals’ Problem A number of Byzantine Generals each have a computer and want to attack the King’s wi-fi by brute forcing the password, which they’ve learned is a certain number of characters in length. Once they stimulate the network to generate a packet, they must crack the password within a limited time to break in and erase the logs, lest they be discovered. They only have enough CPU power to crack it fast enough if a majority of them attack at the same time. They don’t particularly care when the attack will be, just that they agree. It has been decided that anyone who feels like it will announce an attack time, which we’ll call the “plan”, and whatever plan is heard first will be the official plan. The problem is that the network is not instantaneous, and if two generals announce different plans at close to the same time, some may hear one first and others hear the other first. They use a proof-of-work chain to solve the problem. Once each general receives whatever plan he hears first, he sets his computer to solve a difficult hash-based proof-of-work problem that includes the plan in its hash. The proof-of-work is difficult enough that with all of them working at once, it’s expected to take 10 minutes before one of them finds a solution and broadcasts it to the network. Once received, everyone adjusts the hash in their proof-of-work computation to include the first solution, so that when they find the next proof-of-work, it chains after the first one. If anyone was working on a different plan, they switch to this one, because its proof-of-work chain is now longer. After about two hours, the plan should be hashed by a chain of 12 proofs-of-work. Every general, just by verifying the difficulty of the proof-of-work chain, can estimate how much parallel CPU power per hour was expended on it and see that it must have required the majority of the computers to produce in the allotted time. At the least, most of them have seen the plan, since the proof-of-work is proof that they worked on it. If the CPU power exhibited by the proof-of-work is sufficient to crack the password, they can safely attack at the agreed time.

Archophob

CPU mining was a thing back in 2009/2010. Now, it's just wasting electricity to mine with anything other than dedicated mining ASICs. Also, todays CPUs no longer have "unused computing time", as they use the "run to idle" attempt to get any workload done as soon as it occurs, and immediately throttle down as soon as the work is done. This helps to save electricity, avoid overheating, and keeps your cooling fan silent. Seti@home was a thing back when your CPU clock rate was fixed and your fan was continuosly noisy.

vkashen

Thank you, and I agree with much of what you said. In fact, the creation of the blockchain alone could be one of the most significant events in human history, it is truly that amazing. I will say that the insane performance of memecoins somewhat proves that people don't understand the entirety of the technology, and I say this as someone who has written the whitepapers for a few projects and has been involved in crypto since around 2012 when I first learned about it here, on Reddit. I remember the days of mining it on my CPU and then GPU. Those certainly were the days. And to my second point of losing that many, being in finance and familiar with arbitrage, I was doing a lot of that at the time, and simply had the bad luck of having it on a CEX for 2 days when they were cracked (my apologies for being a Reddit pedant, but as someone who was "having fun" as a young kid, hacking is merely doing something with code while cracking is the nefarious activity of finding exploits or some other means to engage in said activity in a digital system). Everything I own in cold storage is self-custodied and protected behind numerous layers of security, both digital and physical, as I took extreme measures after that. What isn't in cold storage is still self-custodied as well, another brilliant aspect of crypto, and unlike the stock market, for example, and I can't imagine the days when people would actually have share certificates in their homes as opposed to a broker-dealer or some form of custodian. So making it both safe and easy to have custody of one's keys is also an amazing thing, putting the power back in the hands of the people. Unfortunately, it is usually people who don't understand how it all works, but here we are. The magical days will be when it is as easy to use (as opposed to a static store of value) as a debit/credit card will be a turning point IMHO, though. I always say that people don't understand how banks actually work, or the internet, yet they still use both every day for many tasks without having to understand the underlying technologies involved. However, I would argue that in many cases, such as banks, it's still a good idea to know (for example if people really understood fractional reserve banking the world might be a very different place). Thank you for your response and I hope you have a nice day/night or rest of your awake time. ;)

Brapplezz

BTCs only flaw is that its not CPU mining based.

Charrua_gamer

Not entirely. I found a project in the gaming/esports industry called GAIMIN.IO. The business model and project are quite extensive, involving CPU/GPU monetization and machine learning, which bridges nodes for AI jobs. They use Esports/PC gamers' PCs when they are not in use. It’s legit. They also own a globally known esports organization. Called the Gladiators or Gaimin Gladiators..The project is still in beta development, but I wanted to note that while there is stigma around crypto/blockchain, there are truly developing projects that utilize this technology. The ticker is $GMRX if you want to do your own research. It’s quite interesting. Just wanted to share that as there are still true projects that have potential and can use tokenomics and general blockchain tech in realworld scenario..

DownvoteALot

And I was just broke. I tried my best in 2011 to mine with my CPU since I couldn't afford a GPU. Even then there were about 3 bitcoins in that hard drive but I lost it since it was nothing at the time. I looked up local bitcoins but couldn't afford even that. Regrets forever.

Blockchainauditor

> It gives you full control over your wealth, so you can truly own your money without relying on a middleman. And yet people choose to impose a middleman, see ETF, Coinbase/Binance, et al. Very few people do the peer-to-peer approach. > It’s built in cryptography, so Bitcoin can’t be hacked. I supposed that depends what you mean by "hacked". See Value Overflow Event of August 15 2010. See also users giving away their BTC for fake 2-for-1 deals, having their keys stolen or intercepted, etc. > It’s immutable and transparent, so transactions can’t be altered and everyone can verify them. It is NOT "immutable" and transactions have been altered. It has been changed. Once again, see Value Overflow Event. Also, see the Bitcoin whitepaper, which says it is not immutable, but if someone has enough power to change it, they will do better mining than changing the blockchain. "The incentive may help encourage nodes to stay honest. If a greedy attacker is able to assemble more CPU power than all the honest nodes, he would have to choose between using it to defraud people by stealing back his payments, or using it to generate new coins. He ought to find it more profitable to play by the rules, such rules that favour him with more new coins than everyone else combined, than to undermine the system and the validity of his own wealth." > It’s digital, so it can move at the speed of light. Depends what you mean by "move". Transactions have commonly taken an hour or more, and sometimes taken days or weeks during times of congestion. Blocks take 10 minutes or so. > It’s ethical, so it aligns with principles of fairness and transparency. Bitcoin is not inherently ethical or unethical. Bitcoin is not inherently fair. Bitcoin is not always "transparent"; while transactions on the blockchain are in the clear, transactions on an exchange, run through a mixer, on an L2 are not transparent. It can be used for ethical and unethical purposes.

JaNuS_d-_-b

Yes it takes a while, but even on my raspy4 with an external USB SSD it did not take that long. U not only Download 500gb Blockchain data, your CPU verifies that data too.. Pretty awesome for 14 years of data accumulated if you ask me.

142NonillionKelvins

Sounds like you need a better CPU or an ssd or faster internet…. Or all three. But it’s obvious you came on here to start shit so I’ll humor you - you should sell all your bitcoin and buy a shitcoin instead and see where that gets you.

GlassGoose4PSN

While I tend not to deal with absolutes, I do lean towards this being impossible with the current state of BTC mining, which is the only possible coin that could return anywhere near this amount upon hitting a block yourself. But that would require at least some hardware capable of mining BTC, which regular computers are not capable of doing anymore. CPU and GPU BTC mining are no longer possible by standard consumer grade computers. It requires data center grade compute power to mine BTC. Even with 10 computers, the odds of hitting a block are so infinitely small as to be impossible on such a short timeline and with a sample group of only one such incident being reported. Occams razor suggests the simplest explanation is often correct, and that is that the number is just inflated or made up.

AmbitiousPhilosopher

Forget coinbase, and forget anything with high fees like Bitcoin. Mining Monero is good if you just have CPU's, and you can get feeless payouts with nanswap mining. Keep the crypto, and spend it directly and get a discount doing it, that's the real money.

realbacktofuture

No, and they don't need to. The entropy won't be the same, even on the same device. For example, it can change depending on how you move your mouse, CPU temperature, and much more. Each manufacturer also adds their own logic into the mix, making it even more random. The chance of two different people having the same passphrase is much less than restoring an unknown wallet with some Bitcoin by guessing all 24 passphrases at once in the right order. If you are asking if that is possible, the answer is yes. If you are asking, can it happen? The answer is no. It's like the chance of the Sun hitting the Earth! Do you think it will happen in your life time?

UberSeoul

>Quantum computing threat. Because it's decentralized, it won't be able to change fast enough and by the time wallets get hacked, nobody can prove it and the decentralized nature of it makes it impossible to reverse transactions in a way that everyone can agree on. Is there somewhere I can read more about this because I don't think this is true. From what I understand, quantum computing can't crack bitcoin because it's would literally require too much electricity. CPU, GPU and even ASICs aren't the restraint, but the electrical grid itself. But I'm want to learn more about the intersection of quantum computer and cryptography.

swiftpwns

"I thought I'd write about the last four years, an eventful time for Bitcoin and me. For those who don't know me, I'm Hal Finney. I got my start in crypto working on an early version of PGP, working closely with Phil Zimmermann. When Phil decided to start PGP Corporation, I was one of the first hires. I would work on PGP until my retirement. At the same time, I got involved with the Cypherpunks. I ran the first cryptographically based anonymous remailer, among other activities. Fast forward to late 2008 and the announcement of Bitcoin. I've noticed that cryptographic graybeards (I was in my mid 50's) tend to get cynical. I was more idealistic; I have always loved crypto, the mystery and the paradox of it. When Satoshi announced Bitcoin on the cryptography mailing list, he got a skeptical reception at best. Cryptographers have seen too many grand schemes by clueless noobs. They tend to have a knee jerk reaction. I was more positive. I had long been interested in cryptographic payment schemes. Plus I was lucky enough to meet and extensively correspond with both Wei Dai and Nick Szabo, generally acknowledged to have created ideas that would be realized with Bitcoin. I had made an attempt to create my own proof of work based currency, called RPOW. So I found Bitcoin facinating. When Satoshi announced the first release of the software, I grabbed it right away. I think I was the first person besides Satoshi to run bitcoin. I mined block 70-something, and I was the recipient of the first bitcoin transaction, when Satoshi sent ten coins to me as a test. I carried on an email conversation with Satoshi over the next few days, mostly me reporting bugs and him fixing them. Today, Satoshi's true identity has become a mystery. But at the time, I thought I was dealing with a young man of Japanese ancestry who was very smart and sincere. I've had the good fortune to know many brilliant people over the course of my life, so I recognize the signs. After a few days, bitcoin was running pretty stably, so I left it running. Those were the days when difficulty was 1, and you could find blocks with a CPU, not even a GPU. I mined several blocks over the next days. But I turned it off because it made my computer run hot, and the fan noise bothered me. In retrospect, I wish I had kept it up longer, but on the other hand I was extraordinarily lucky to be there at the beginning. It's one of those glass half full half empty things. The next I heard of Bitcoin was late 2010, when I was surprised to find that it was not only still going, bitcoins actually had monetary value. I dusted off my old wallet, and was relieved to discover that my bitcoins were still there. As the price climbed up to real money, I transferred the coins into an offline wallet, where hopefully they'll be worth something to my heirs. Speaking of heirs, I got a surprise in 2009, when I was suddenly diagnosed with a fatal disease. I was in the best shape of my life at the start of that year, I'd lost a lot of weight and taken up distance running. I'd run several half marathons, and I was starting to train for a full marathon. I worked my way up to 20+ mile runs, and I thought I was all set. That's when everything went wrong. My body began to fail. I slurred my speech, lost strength in my hands, and my legs were slow to recover. In August, 2009, I was given the diagnosis of ALS, also called Lou Gehrig's disease, after the famous baseball player who got it. ALS is a disease that kills moter neurons, which carry signals from the brain to the muscles. It causes first weakness, then gradually increasing paralysis. It is usually fatal in 2 to 5 years. My symptoms were mild at first and I continued to work, but fatigue and voice problems forced me to retire in early 2011. Since then the disease has continued its inexorable progression. Today, I am essentially paralyzed. I am fed through a tube, and my breathing is assisted through another tube. I operate the computer using a commercial eyetracker system. It also has a speech synthesizer, so this is my voice now. I spend all day in my power wheelchair. I worked up an interface using an arduino so that I can adjust my wheelchair's position using my eyes. It has been an adjustment, but my life is not too bad. I can still read, listen to music, and watch TV and movies. I recently discovered that I can even write code. It's very slow, probably 50 times slower than I was before. But I still love programming and it gives me goals. Currently I'm working on something Mike Hearn suggested, using the security features of modern processors, designed to support "Trusted Computing", to harden Bitcoin wallets. It's almost ready to release. I just have to do the documentation. And of course the price gyrations of bitcoins are entertaining to me. I have skin in the game. But I came by my bitcoins through luck, with little credit to me. I lived through the crash of 2011. So I've seen it before. Easy come, easy go. That's my story. I'm pretty lucky overall. Even with the ALS, my life is very satisfying. But my life expectancy is limited. Those discussions about inheriting your bitcoins are of more than academic interest. My bitcoins are stored in our safe deposit box, and my son and daughter are tech savvy. I think they're safe enough. I'm comfortable with my legacy. [edited slightly]"

hank1321

>As long as the majority of CPU power is with the legit squad and not some shady crew trying to wreck things, they'll keep the chain lit and outpace the attackers. The network is mad chill with minimal structure, messages get broadcasted on a “best effort” basis, and nodes can dip in and out whenever they want. They just vibe with the longest proof-of-work chain to stay on track.

wood8

Transaction is just an umbrella term for any action performed on blockchain, so of course every innovation is about transaction. However, TPS is the most overrated term. If you run this code `while(true) process_tx()`, I wouldn't be surprised if you get 1 million+ TPS. We already solved TPS by having a decent computer. Blockchain having a limited TPS mainly because we want to have a reasonable data growth rate. In other words, the TPS limit is man-made, not hardware or software limit, so there is nothing to innovate about it. Most blockchains today saying they implemented sharding or parallel computing, they couldn't even max out 1 CPU thread even if all workload is on that thread. Those "innovation" are just buzzwords to pump their bag. The real innovation people are working on rn is L2 interoperability and account abstraction. You can pay transaction fee without native token. You can use L2 without knowing you are using L2, because interoperability makes it feel like part of a super cheap L1. The recent development of blob on ETH is quite innovative. For the most part of blockchain history, blockchain acts as a database where once data entered, it can't be modified or deleted. Nobody ever asked, what about can't be modified but can be deleted, until someone proposed blob. It's so obvious once you see it, we need something that is verifiable for a period of time, but not occupy the space permanently, how come nobody think of this combination before?

hank1321

>"As long as the majority of CPU power is with the legit squad and not some shady crew trying to wreck things, they'll keep the chain lit and outpace the attackers. The network is mad chill with minimal structure, messages get broadcasted on a “best effort” basis, and nodes can dip in and out whenever they want. They just vibe with the longest proof-of-work chain to stay on track." Couldn't have said it better myself. :D

TP_Crisis_2020

You can acquire QRL now by mining it. I've been mining it on all of the PC's in my house since 2018. Uses a CPU algorithm.

JamesTDennis

Bitcoin has utility. ☞ It has an issuance mechanism that entails no trusted parties and which can be easily audited anyone, anywhere, with just a few gigabytes of memory, a few dozen gigabytes of reasonably reliable storage, and a reasonably modern CPU. ☞ This means that it can't be effectively counterfeit nor can it be "re-hypotheticated" (subject to fractional reserve machinations. ☞ it's possible to securely transfer "ownership" (control) of any quantity of Bitcoin that you have down to around 1000 "satoshis" (hundred millionths if one Bitcoin) through a censorship resistant, pseudonymous, peer-to-peer network without ever exchanging any identifiable information with your counterparty). ☞ these transactions are technically scripts in a deliberately constrained scripting language which is sufficient to implement a number of useful "smart contracts"; it's "programmable money." ☞ it's possible for funds to be held in cryptographically enforced shared custody, escrow, time locked, and oracle adjudicated forms of custody (contracts) — while preserving its security and maintaining minimal trust of any parties. ☞ transaction processing is performed by any number of agents who can join and leave the network without any centralized coordinating authority, and who are subject to economic incentives to do so; they're paid form their diligent and competent efforts. In other words, it serves the functions of a monetary currency (Store-of-Value, Medium-of-Exchange, Unit-of-Account) for those who choose to use it, while having digital/cryptographic qualities which are unlike any form of currency that preceded it. It's the synthesis of a couple of decades of research by cryptographers and cryptologists, software developers, and economic/social/political activists. While anyone can create new cryptocurrencies with the same technical features, they cannot go back in time to establish the same innovators' traction and credibility. Every altcoin is an "also ran" imitator at best (and an outright affinity fraud or scam in most cases). The value of Bitcoin is ultimately determined by a critical mass of those availing themselves of its utility.

HSuke

I feel like the MegaETH team just wants to figure out how fast they can make a sequencer if they didn't need to care about anything else. For more details, you'd have to read https://megaeth.systems/research since this article doesn't give sufficient info on how it would work. MegaETH is a theoretical concept for an L2 using a sequencer that can build blocks at **100k TPS** with 10^9 Gas/s, $0.01 transaction fees, and < 1ms block time. The sequencer would require 100 CPU cores and 1-4TB of memory. But even then, it would still be 10x too slow for 100k TPS. The team would also need to invent an EVM interpreter at is 10-100x faster. Even if such a sequencer were possible, nodes and RPCs would likely have trouble keeping up and relaying data to end users. So it's currently just theoretical.

trimalcus

You can mine XMR with existing rigs. Just using CPU

Soil_Electronic

They fired 15K people,didn’t meet their earnings expectations theres issues with 13/14th CPU’s dying

ShinAlastor

I would also mine Bitcoin just using my CPU if I could go back in 2009.

SocietyTomorrow

500GB is the raw amount to download, but if you are using a low spec PC to download it, the CPU also does basic calculations to verify the blocks downloaded are consistent so it can slow things down a little. I’ve not used Bitcoin Core wallet in a while, but if I remember correctly, you might be able to save a significant chunk of time by getting a recent bootstrap file. Bootstrap.dat files were always hosted by unaffiliated third parties, so may not really be the safest way to go, and if the reason for your sync to take 2 weeks really is because of CPU being the bottleneck, won’t help you at all.

Boon_Rebu

It can be mined on cpu, but it's not profitable. The difficulty level has increased to a point were the hashing power of even the best CPU can not produce results to be profitable. Early on, CPU mining was king, then people discovered GPUS were better at it, CPU became obsolete. Then someone created ASIC and GPUs became extinct as with additional hashing power on the network the higher the difficulty becomes. The only way you could have a blockchain on a CPU mining system is if hashing power was directly related to number of coins produced with no curve in difficulty. Basically the most hashing power on the chain the more coins generated. You would have a system that indefinitely produces coins created deflationary value till a equilibrium of people willing to hash for the value of the reward is met. or You could have a coin that has a max limited number of coins ever to be in existence, you would have a MAD arms race to see who could mine as many as possible the fastest. Cpus, GPUS, Asic all battling in out to gobble up the coins. But then, what happens when the max is reached? You would no longer get any coins as rewards for mining the next block. The miners would need to be solely paid by the fees on transactions. If there are no transactions, there are no fees, there is no point to mine it and waste money on electricity. If there are transactions, how large would the fee need to be to incentivize miners to keep mining that block instead of moving over to a different coin? If there is no hashing power, there is no coin, if there is low hashing power, the chain becomes vulnerable to 50% attack.

anotherbrckinTH3Wall

Do some research for crying out loud. It’s pointless trying to mine with GPU/CPU’s these days. If you are serious about mining bitcoin, you’ll need to purchase a dedicated miner, you could get an old antminer for about 6k, even then you’d need to mine for years, with no guarantee of getting a block reward, and having to cover the electricity costs. One option would be to join a mining pool to increase chances.

damchi

VPN access with my CPU mined bitcoin.

Bunker_Beans

My CPU is a neural-net processor; a learning computer.

OderWieOderWatJunge

If you bought for $4 good for you, you may be at least a little rich. But what's the point? Bitcoin was practically free at the beginning. 5 BTC for solving a captcha. Mining with your CPU. Buying it for 60 cents. But did we buy? No.

yebyen

Bro don't even worry about it I mined 200BTC in a couple of days on my CPU when Bitcoin was new and I sold it for like $25 on Paypal, I was so proud of myself, I knew what I had too, but I didn't keep any long-term 🤣

Masteries

>At a difficulty of 1, people will be able to solo CPU mine again Will they though? Why do we have all this massive electricty wasting then, if it is not even necessary?

satbug

At these difficulties, people will be able to solo CPU mine again. Are you concerned that no one will have the capital available to leave their laptop running overnight?

csolisr

I remember the old time of 2010. I had somehow gotten a whole Bitcoin (which was worth about a dollar) after trading it for CPU-mined Litecoins and filling surveys. Then I put them in a "bank" that offered loans and savings accounts, and it worked for a while... then the site went down without a trace. I still managed to bounce back later, most of my 3DS digital library came from there.

Solidaire3000

You are telling me CPU mining lead to more decentrilization because because it’s harder for large mining farms to gain control of all the processing?

deltamoney

An asic machine costs thousands and is dedicated to one algorithm. CPU is a much more level playing field since pretty much anyone and everyone can get a CPU and process the algorithm. It’s not that it’s friendly per se. It’s just that it’s harder for large mining farms to gain control of all the processing.

Solidaire3000

Why are CPU’s more friendly than ASIC’s ? Energy efficience ? Cost ? Something else ?

Solidaire3000

Why are CPU’s more friendly than ASIC’s ? Energy efficience ? Cost ? Something else ?

deltamoney

The algorithm is what ultimately secures and is used to show proof of work. Each algorithm is processed differently, how the algorithm is processed helps determine what and who can do the processing. Some require more memory. Some CPU. Some GPUs. Some ASICS. That’s why there’s different algorithms usually the community is targeting something. They don’t want ASICS. They want CPU, which is more friendly to individual miners.

castorfromtheva

Get a used lenovo tiny or Dell optiplex with at least a Gen. 6 CPU and a 2 Tbyte SSD. Along with at least 4 gigs of RAM or at least 8 GByte if you plan to also run a lightning node and others services like an own mempool explorer or Electrum server on top. All in all such a machine will be 150 to 200 bucks and will cost you around 2 to 3 bucks per months in energy.

castorfromtheva

These days the initial blockchain dowload takes around 2 to 4 days given you are using a normal x86 CPU, not a Raspi one, have a least 4, better u 8 gigs of RAM and most important uses a SSD you're syncing to. Patience is one of the most important virtues bitcoin teaches anyways.

mcbergstedt

I was like 16 at the time and only had my shitty laptop. CPU mining had just become unprofitable and I didn’t have the money for a gaming desktop for mining

Mr_Eckert

I doubt he has any regrets, dude had a shit ton of BTC back in the early days. 10k was almost nothing for him, he did that pizza trade something like 8 times. He was one of the first people to figure out how to mine using a GPU, giving him a huge advantage over the CPU miners of the time. Laszlo is probably laughing his way to the bank.

spearsy33

I was using NiceHash for a while…. And use a piece of software to monitor temps and put them to sleep if they get too hot. I also found that you have to put a limit on the cpu so it doesn’t run full bore. After a month or so I decided it wasn’t worth it… I was mining with a HP invictus gaming laptop, using the CPU, and both graphics cards… but it just wasn’t worth the potential damage and electricity. Unfortuantely for bitcoin it’s ASIC or bust at this point.

analogOnly

lmao homie just destroyed 27 office laptops. Yes. HEAT is an ISSUE. Be it a CPU or GPU or an ASIC. Running a computer constantly doing nothing but HASHING is going to cause A LOT OF HEAT.

CointestMod

#TRON Con-Arguments Below is a TRON con-argument written by CreepToeCurrentSea. > TRON is a decentralized, open-source blockchain-based operating system with smart contract functionality, a proof-of-stake consensus algorithm, and its own cryptocurrency, Tronix (TRX). Justin Sun founded it in March 2014, and it has been overseen and supervised by the TRON Foundation, a non-profit organization in Singapore founded the same year. It began as an Ethereum-based ERC-20 token before migrating to its own blockchain in 2018. > > # CONS > > **Whitepaper Plagiarism** > > In January 2018, Tron's developers were accused of plagiarism after many sections of the Tron whitepaper appeared nearly identical to IPFS and Filecoin technical documentation. IPFS is an acronym for InterPlanetary File System. Juan Benet, CEO of Protocol Labs, which develops IFPS tools and services, revealed on Twitter in early January 2018 that Tron's whitepaper authors did not properly cite references and that the document was "mostly copied" from other projects. Even the equations and formulas mentioned in the first version of Tron's whitepaper were identical to those found in IPFS documentation. Sun claimed to have a "very detailed" reference to the most recent Chinese version of the Tron whitepaper. He also claimed that the Tron paper was translated into other languages by volunteers who may have overlooked important details. Just as Vitalik had also sarcastically said in twitter regarding the teams copy-pasting abilities, this just goes to show how un-genuine their team appears even making the most basic of mistakes. > > **Question of Vulnerability** > > A barrage of requests sent by a single PC could be used to squeeze the power of the blockchain's CPU, overload the memory, and perform a distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack, according to HackerOne. "Using a single machine, an attacker could send DDOS attack to all or 51 percent of the Super Representative (SR) node and render Tron network unusable or unavailable," the claim goes. While TRON is somewhat better in marketing compared to other cryptocurrencies, it falls short on one of the most important pillars for an effective one, that of which is security. To hinder a blockchain with just one computer is the polar opposite of what you want a cryptocurrency to be. > > **Un-Stablecoin** > > TRON's native stablecoin "USDD" de-pegged to the US dollar earlier this year, falling to as low as 91 cents. Its design is uncannily similar to Terra's stablecoin, UST, which lost its price peg and imploded a month ago, wiping out $40 billion in market value. If it continues to follow UST's path considering how similar they are in function and structure, one could assume they also have a ticking algorithmic time bomb in the making. > > **Final Thoughts** > > It seems that TRON has a knack for idolizing (to the point of almost copying their work) other projects both in and out of the crypto-sphere. What I do hope is that they also know what not absorb. Else, they have nothing but a mushed up bowl of their favorite things and just decided it would stick together with glue and duct tape. > > Sources: > > [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tron\_(cryptocurrency)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tron_(cryptocurrency)) > > [https://cryptoslate.com/justin-suns-controversies-plagiarism-teslas-warren-buffett-kidney-stones-and-a-deleted-apology/](https://cryptoslate.com/justin-suns-controversies-plagiarism-teslas-warren-buffett-kidney-stones-and-a-deleted-apology/) > > [https://www.inverse.com/article/40050-tron-trx-cryptocurrency-plagiarism-scandal](https://www.inverse.com/article/40050-tron-trx-cryptocurrency-plagiarism-scandal) > > [https://www.zdnet.com/article/tron-critical-security-flaw-could-break-the-entire-blockchain/](https://www.zdnet.com/article/tron-critical-security-flaw-could-break-the-entire-blockchain/) > > [https://fortune.com/2022/06/13/algorithmic-stablecoin-usdd-loses-peg-justin-sun-tron-decentralized-usd/](https://fortune.com/2022/06/13/algorithmic-stablecoin-usdd-loses-peg-justin-sun-tron-decentralized-usd/) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_tron) to find submissions for other topics.