Ethereum: Why Bitcoin’s evidence of algorithm is not appropriate
Many experts in the field have extensively taken the Bitcoin (POW) algorithm (POW) algorithm (POW) algorithm. However, a more detailed study reveals that this algorithm may not be as effective as previously thought, especially when it comes to maintaining a relatively flat block.
Current Pow algorithm
Bitcoin’s current Pow algorithm is based on the Sha-256 Hash feature, which takes the block title and sends a unique 256-bit digital fingerprint. The resulting hash is then used as a “severity” of mining workers. This process requires significant computational force, energy consumption and the use of resources.
The result of this algorithm is the timing of the block, which can be described as sparse. Because the Bitcoin network has an average of about 10 minutes, it is not uncommon to see blocks that are several hours or even days. This uneven distribution can lead to frustration among users who rely on fast event processing and high frequency trade.
Why may lower -care hashit may be a better approach
The current Pow algorithm can be criticized for its lack of adaptability, leading to inefficient use of deferred resources. However, some experts suggest alternative algorithms that may provide better performance while maintaining a more cohesive block distribution.
One potential solution is the algorithm of the certificate (POS), also known as defi (decentralized funding). This approach uses a different type of hash that requires mining workers to take some of their ownership of encryption technology instead of using computational force. The resulting “difficulty target” is determined on the basis of the number of coins invested, leading to a more uniform block distribution.
Chain of the Hash of Business Hash
If we imagined an Ethereum-based system where Pow is replaced by POS, we may consider the next alternative approach:
Instead of using one Hash in difficulties 12, what if we designed a lower rare hashish chain? For example, we could use a set of six seals, each corresponds to a different level of difficulty (eg 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 1.0, 1.2 and 1.4). These seals are used as “difficulty” for mining workers.
In order to ensure the consistency of the group, we can implement a mechanism that ensures that each mining worker has occasionally selected from lower difficulty seals. This approach would provide a more uniform distribution of the blocks over time, reducing the likelihood of excessive mining forces and promoting healthy competition for mining workers.
ATTENTION OF ACTIVITIES
Implementing such an algorithm in Ethereum would require significant changes to the online architecture, including:
- Design of Hash Functions : Designing Hash used for POS would have a critical role in determining the effectiveness of this approach.
- Selcome Management : The mechanism should be set up to manage and adjust the severity when they change more or less effective.
- Mining Pool requirements : Mining workers should be encouraged to participate in a new system that may include changes in the network consensus rules or additional fees.
conclusion
Although the current Bitcoin Pow algorithm is effective to maintain a relatively even block distribution, it may not be enough for long-term sustainability and growth. By studying alternative approaches, such as lower fraudulent hashish or preparedness certificate, we can promote more effective use of deferred resources and create a more flexible and scalable system.
Deixe um comentário