Common wisdom was that it's impossible to design an ASIC-proof Proof of Work algorithm. tevador, SChernyk, and I proved that bit of "wisdom" wrong with RandomX. Folks who understand hardware design actually get it.
np.reddit.com/r/Buttcoin/com…
np.reddit.com/r/Buttcoin/com…
We started over 2 years ago from the simple insight that ASICs can only optimize individual algorithms, and thus we needed a dynamic approach. old.reddit.com/r/Monero/comme…
Months of prototyping and testing went in before we arrived at the current design.
Months of prototyping and testing went in before we arrived at the current design.
It would be a fair statement to say that we've changed the world's understanding of Proof of Work and ASIC resistance. tevador has gone on to design other dynamic algorithms for different work scenarios, like Equi-X for the TOR Project. lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-…
These insights aren't unique, but are perhaps too rare these days.
Donald Knuth summed it up well back in 1968. "By understanding a machine-oriented language, the programmer will tend to use a much more efficient method; it is much closer to reality."
Donald Knuth summed it up well back in 1968. "By understanding a machine-oriented language, the programmer will tend to use a much more efficient method; it is much closer to reality."
To be a good software engineer you must understand the hardware as well.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
