Skip to main content
Tweeted twitter.com/StackCrypto/status/1137509912949481472
typo in title
Link
Ella Rose
  • 19.9k
  • 6
  • 55
  • 103

Estimating difficulty of "Memory-Hard Proof-of-Work" based on "sized"size of memory"?

added 82 characters in body
Source Link
Questioner
  • 211
  • 1
  • 8

In Bitcoin proof-of-work, the difficulty of Proof-of-Work is estimated and calculated based on total hashing power of the participants. If total hashing power of the participants is higher, then PoW is more difficult.

  • If we use a Memory-Hard-Proof-of-Work scheme, the difficulty of Proof-of-Work is still estimated based on the hashing power ? OR based on the size of memory ?

  • In other word, is it feasible to design a Memory-Hard-Proof-of-Work scheme in which we could estimate the Pow difficulty based on the size of memory, instead of hashing power of participants ?

  • Has such a Memory-Hard-Proof-of-Work scheme designed yet by which we could estimate the difficulty based on memory size?

Just as an example: a Memory-Hardened Proof-of-Work Scheme: https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/1168.pdf

P.S. 1: Related question: Memory-hard proof-of-work: are they ASIC-resistant?

P.S. 2: If you need any further complementary explanation about the question, please let me know.

In Bitcoin proof-of-work, the difficulty of Proof-of-Work is estimated and calculated based on total hashing power of the participants.

  • If we use a Memory-Hard-Proof-of-Work scheme, the difficulty of Proof-of-Work is still estimated based on the hashing power ? OR based on the size of memory ?

  • In other word, is it feasible to design a Memory-Hard-Proof-of-Work scheme in which we could estimate the Pow difficulty based on the size of memory, instead of hashing power of participants ?

  • Has such a Memory-Hard-Proof-of-Work scheme designed yet by which we could estimate the difficulty based on memory size?

Just as an example: a Memory-Hardened Proof-of-Work Scheme: https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/1168.pdf

P.S. 1: Related question: Memory-hard proof-of-work: are they ASIC-resistant?

P.S. 2: If you need any further complementary explanation about the question, please let me know.

In Bitcoin proof-of-work, the difficulty of Proof-of-Work is estimated and calculated based on total hashing power of the participants. If total hashing power of the participants is higher, then PoW is more difficult.

  • If we use a Memory-Hard-Proof-of-Work scheme, the difficulty of Proof-of-Work is still estimated based on the hashing power ? OR based on the size of memory ?

  • In other word, is it feasible to design a Memory-Hard-Proof-of-Work scheme in which we could estimate the Pow difficulty based on the size of memory, instead of hashing power of participants ?

  • Has such a Memory-Hard-Proof-of-Work scheme designed yet by which we could estimate the difficulty based on memory size?

Just as an example: a Memory-Hardened Proof-of-Work Scheme: https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/1168.pdf

P.S. 1: Related question: Memory-hard proof-of-work: are they ASIC-resistant?

P.S. 2: If you need any further complementary explanation about the question, please let me know.

Source Link
Questioner
  • 211
  • 1
  • 8

Estimating difficulty of "Memory-Hard Proof-of-Work" based on "sized of memory"?

In Bitcoin proof-of-work, the difficulty of Proof-of-Work is estimated and calculated based on total hashing power of the participants.

  • If we use a Memory-Hard-Proof-of-Work scheme, the difficulty of Proof-of-Work is still estimated based on the hashing power ? OR based on the size of memory ?

  • In other word, is it feasible to design a Memory-Hard-Proof-of-Work scheme in which we could estimate the Pow difficulty based on the size of memory, instead of hashing power of participants ?

  • Has such a Memory-Hard-Proof-of-Work scheme designed yet by which we could estimate the difficulty based on memory size?

Just as an example: a Memory-Hardened Proof-of-Work Scheme: https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/1168.pdf

P.S. 1: Related question: Memory-hard proof-of-work: are they ASIC-resistant?

P.S. 2: If you need any further complementary explanation about the question, please let me know.