Most active commenters
  • Jerrrrrrry(4)
  • tromp(3)

←back to thread

359 points sdsykes | 20 comments | | HN request time: 0.014s | source | bottom
Show context
ziofill ◴[] No.41884391[source]
I can swear something like 20+ years ago I found a new one too, but I didn’t realize the importance of it. I had just downloaded GIMPS and I was just messing around with it, and when I saw the message I thought “ok, cool!” and proceeded to turn it off.
replies(7): >>41884608 #>>41884713 #>>41884743 #>>41884789 #>>41885406 #>>41885640 #>>41885885 #
schoen ◴[] No.41884789[source]
If it was literally around "20+ years ago", like 2004 or slightly before, it might have been M40 or M41.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mersenne_primes_and_pe...

If this happened the way you remember, it's really unfortunate, but it wouldn't have stopped the prime in question from being discovered, because GIMPS always at least eventually gives out numbers to multiple people to check, and doesn't mark Mersenne numbers as checked until a computer actively reports that they were checked.

However, your name could have ended up on that Wikipedia list as a discoverer. :-)

replies(2): >>41885263 #>>41893904 #
aphantastic ◴[] No.41885263[source]
Interesting that all the primes since 2001 have been discovered by Intel processors (at least those where the processor was recorded). How’s that for marketing?
replies(2): >>41885345 #>>41885348 #
1. Jerrrrrrry ◴[] No.41885348[source]
If bitcoin used a facet of primality in its Proof-of-Work, that would nearly needlessly gloating.

But it doesn't, and unfortunately even worse, it wasn't ASIC-resistant, which had second-order effects that Intel could had actually taken advantage of if they werent sleeping from being too comfortable.

replies(4): >>41885485 #>>41885722 #>>41887855 #>>41888230 #
2. freeqaz ◴[] No.41885485[source]
Is there a good POW mechanism that would test primes?

I found this but curious what else exists! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primecoin

replies(3): >>41885586 #>>41886466 #>>41889311 #
3. Jerrrrrrry ◴[] No.41885586[source]
Thats it (afaik), and it could be for the usual, dismissive reasons, but its easy to hand-waive the "make primality a part of the work" part but it also comes down to the properties of the work that require it to be useful:

the difficulty of the work must be adjustable,

the difficulty/reward ratio must scale to the polynomial of users/work-rate to avoid sybil/"51% (31%)" attacks, and dissuade volatility during transitions

must be easily verifiable,

Primecoin uses Cunningham Chain primes - basically sequences of primes where 2x+1 is prime.

They are marginally useful with other applications on the horizon.

I could see adjusting the arbitrary rule-set - similar to the varying rulesets of cellular automata, like Conways - to further Number Theory/Game Theory/Swarm Economics at a general interdisciplinary level to be the most potentially rewarding, covering a larger swath of unknown unknowns.

replies(2): >>41885622 #>>41886478 #
4. aphantastic ◴[] No.41885622{3}[source]
My favorite “Practical POW” remains komoglorav complexity computation. The reward would likely scale with the runtime needed to verify a complexity, but there’s plenty of room for subtleties in the implementation. (for instance what happens when you prove a prior established complexity wrong?)
replies(1): >>41885752 #
5. zeven7 ◴[] No.41885722[source]
This reminded me that I used to leave my computer running Folding@home or similar projects around 2010-2011. Not sure if it ever contributed to anything. If only I had known to run a Bitcoin miner instead!
replies(2): >>41886199 #>>41889790 #
6. Jerrrrrrry ◴[] No.41885752{4}[source]

  >(for instance what happens when you prove a prior established complexity wrong?)

what do you mean? you run their wallets, pun intended!

No stakes, no steaks!

But it does seem interesting - counterintuitive really, but a "Busy Beaver" / proof of work verifying mechanism enumerating inputs/instructions/outputs randomly (or whatever the nodes think they know best at ) while rewarding (only? why not top 3?) the shortest, most efficient block...could be tweaked to crunch ETH contracts like gas, brute-force fuzz-test legacy unsafe sourcecode...literally a foundation for further distributed computation.

There are languages like it - Dennis and his Bubblegum - that have generative, selective, and compressive patterns interned already.

https://esolangs.org/wiki/Bubblegum

7. tirant ◴[] No.41886199[source]
Back in 2009-2010 I was responsible for deploying 8-16 core servers to customers to run large databases and ERPs. I had the idea of doing some burn in testing to stress the components for around a week for each server. Back then I was aware of bitcoin but also SETI@home. Obviously I chose the second option as I believed it was probable my a better choice for humans kind. It obviously was, but bitcoin mining would have been a better one for me.
replies(2): >>41886434 #>>41894874 #
8. omgwtfbyobbq ◴[] No.41886434{3}[source]
I remember some rough calculations suggested I needed to upgrade from agp to pcie to make bitcoin mining worth it financially. I went with boinc instead.
replies(1): >>41888670 #
9. tromp ◴[] No.41886466[source]
There's also https://gapcoin.org/ for searching prime number gaps (mine the gap).
replies(1): >>41886520 #
10. tromp ◴[] No.41886478{3}[source]
You forgot one important property: it must commit to the new block(header).
11. Jerrrrrrry ◴[] No.41886520{3}[source]
I knew I forgot something, thank you!

10 years!

replies(1): >>41887026 #
12. tromp ◴[] No.41887026{4}[source]
There's also https://riecoin.xyz/ searching prime constellations.
13. shawnz ◴[] No.41887855[source]
The work in a PoW algorithm has to be otherwise useless in order for it to most effectively deter abuse, or else you'd still be able to get value out of failed attack attempts
14. loup-vaillant ◴[] No.41888230[source]
What second order effect are you referring to? Stuff like manufacturing, or fab availability perhaps?
15. andrepd ◴[] No.41888670{4}[source]
I remember calculating that the 0.08 btc that I was mining per day on my desktop wasn't worth the electricity.
replies(1): >>41890516 #
16. dgacmu ◴[] No.41889311[source]
Primecoin (Cunningham chains)

Gapcoin (finding large gaps between successive primes)

Riecoin (finding maximally dense prime clusters of size 6)

Nexus (finding almost-dense clusters with a maximum spacing between successive primes)

As an aside, picking a mathematically interesting and intricate proof of work function is probably a bad idea, because someone like me will come along and optimize the miner and mine privately at a large profit margin, as I did with two of these coins.

replies(1): >>41889678 #
17. einpoklum ◴[] No.41889678{3}[source]
Don't forget:

Primemarkcoin

Perceptiongapcoin

Liecoin

epiplexiscoin

and of course, the every useful pyramidcoin and scamcoin.

18. JKCalhoun ◴[] No.41889790[source]
I ran the SETI software as well. Was not Bitcoin mining....

I suspect neither your or I though have ever had to turn over a landfill looking for a hard drive. So there's that anyway.

19. lupire ◴[] No.41890516{5}[source]
That's exactly how Bitcoin is designed to autobalance. It's only worthwhile if you believe demand will increase in future.
20. ahazred8ta ◴[] No.41894874{3}[source]
Maxim 19: The world is richer when you turn enemies into friends, but that's not the same as you being richer.