Hi all,

I was excited about the possibility of combining BOINC projects with cryptocurrency, which could result in magnitudes more computational power being contributed to important mathematical and scientific problems through the built-in economic incentivisation mechanisms of cryptocurrencies.

I have been developing cryptocurrencies since 2013, and I think it may in fact be possible to do this. The first project of this kind was called Primecoin ( http://primecoin.io/ ) which economically incentivizes finding long Cunningham Chains. For several years, this project found some of the largest known cunningham chains.

It would be exciting to see if cryptocurrency incentivisation can also be applied to BOINC project. For it to work, there are 2 requirements:

1) The mathematical problem must be divisible into smaller subproblems that can allow contributors of computational power to "prove" that they in fact contributed computational power to the BOINC project.
2) The solution to the smaller subproblems must be "easy to verify" by anyone. This means that it shouldn't take longer than a minute for a typical computer to verify that someone in fact did the "computational work" needed to get the solution to the smaller subproblem. (basically, the same concept as "proof of work" found in Bitcoin)

Note: There is already a project called "Gridcoin" that contributes computational power directly to BOINC. However, Gridcoin requires a central party to verify that the computational work was actually done, so it is not a truly distributed cryptocurrency. This is why the 2 above requirements are important.

Cryptocurrency can be combined with any mathematical or scientific problem, not just strictly pre-existing BOINC projects. If anybody has ideas, I'd love to hear your thoughts :)

Ryan

1) The mathematical problem must be divisible into smaller subproblems that can allow contributors of computational power to "prove" that they in fact contributed computational power to the BOINC project.

Some mathematical problems' are considered a waste of resources and are avoided by some users.

2) The solution to the smaller subproblems must be "easy to verify" by anyone.

I agree, that would be nice to have. Unfortunately, IMHO the more complicated the problem, the less likely the solution is simple. Frequently there are many solutions to a problem but an exhaustive search must be done to find the best.

Gridcoin requires a central party to verify that the computational work was actually done

Unfortunately, humans can lie, cheat and steal in addition to simple "erring". The projects verify the work was done, but what if they are mistaken, or an abuser has inside knowledge or support from a project insider? SETI had their cheaters back in '99. Collatz only found out about fake results being returned when the gridcoin people spotted an anomaly in coinage.

Not mentioned in your post is how one would handle malware that installs BOINC or bots that users install but are unaware of.

After a brief flirtation with Gridcoin I am steering clear of using my computer to accumulate hypothetical wealth. Mostly because the only project I run except when there is no work is CPDN which with only weekly credit updates and an at times erratic supply of work doesn't fulfil their requirements for whitelisting.

Something to consider.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/bitcoin-emits-as-much-carbon-as-las-vegas-researchers-say/

Bitcoin is responsible for the same amount of carbon dioxide emissions as a city like Las Vegas or Hamburg, and it's time to consider how to reduce its climate footprint, researchers said Thursday.

A study by researchers at the Technical University of Munich and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology examined how much power is consumed by computers used to generate bitcoins and process transactions.

Writing in the journal Joule, researchers said they then combined the results with the carbon emissions from electricity production in the countries where the computers were located.

Bitcoin is responsible for the same amount of carbon dioxide emissions as a city like Las Vegas or Hamburg, and it's time to consider how to reduce its climate footprint, researchers said Thursday.

It is worse than that
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/bitcoin-mining-energy-consumption/
I completely agree %100 as far as ASIC (ant mining) is concerned: calculating a blockchain just for the sake of the calculation.

The only thing good about it is the development of the blockchain technology

A blockchain is a decentralized, distributed and public digital ledger
that is used to record transactions across many computers so that any involved
record cannot be altered retroactively, without the alteration of all subsequent blocks.

This is quite useful and potentially can reduce costs in financial and banking industries.
Not always mentioned is capability of anonymous or untraceable transactions take make it easy that criminals can take advantage of.
I personally have received extortion spam and there is not much that can be done about it.

that all being said, carbon dioxide is not a demonic gas and satellite studies show the earth is greening from more of a gas that is essential to life.
I personally do not know of anyone who believes the earth is not warming or that humans don’t share some of the blame.
Why are people who disagree with the “global consensus” on climate warming called denialists?
Because believers are intolerant of other people viewpoints and deaminize anyone who disagrees with them.
Calling someone a climate denialist likens them to holocaust deniers and is an insult and lack of civility.
The primary disagreement is the belief that CO2 is the control knob that can cure global warming.

Calling someone a climate denialist likens them to holocaust deniers and is an insult and lack of civility.

Not when those denying the scientific consensus are doing so because of vested interests rather than a genuine belief that the scientific consensus is wrong. (I know people who genuinely believe that all the talk about climate change is a conspiracy along with vaccination, the introduction of 5G and much else besides.) I have long since given up arguing with them about it.

Calling someone a climate denialist likens them to holocaust deniers and is an insult and lack of civility.

Not when those denying the scientific consensus are doing so because of vested interests rather than a genuine belief that the scientific consensus is wrong. (I know people who genuinely believe that all the talk about climate change is a conspiracy along with vaccination, the introduction of 5G and much else besides.) I have long since given up arguing with them about it.

The last time I got into a discussion about this topic I got put on the stop forum spam list and took me a week to get off. I no longer crunch any climate related projects and never will as only a moderator or project insider could do that.

The last time I got into a discussion about this topic I got put on the stop forum spam list and took me a week to get off. I no longer crunch any climate related projects and never will as only a moderator or project insider could do that.

A shame, I think the climate science is probably the most valuable work on BOINC which is why it is the only project I crunch except when it runs out of work.

Don't remember that discussion. Certainly before I became a moderator. I don't think I have the power to do that, though I have moved multiple advertising posts to <HIDDEN> I certainly don't like shutting down discussion.

In fact, apart from advertising, I haven't seen anything on there that I would consider spam. Just the occasional post that would be better off in a different section of the forums but then I see that here sometimes too.

Calling someone a climate denialist likens them to holocaust deniers and is an insult and lack of civility.

Not when those denying the scientific consensus are doing so because of vested interests rather than a genuine belief that the scientific consensus is wrong. (I know people who genuinely believe that all the talk about climate change is a conspiracy along with vaccination, the introduction of 5G and much else besides.) I have long since given up arguing with them about it.

The last time I got into a discussion about this topic I got put on the stop forum spam list and took me a week to get off. I no longer crunch any climate related projects and never will as only a moderator or project insider could do that.

I hate SFS. Either someone used my email address or I used my email on my VPN where someone else did something bad so my email was linked to the bad IP and thus banned. No accountability whatsoever and a PIA to get it fixed.

Most recent bitcoin electricity comparison:

...Bitcoin accounts for roughly 0.25 percent of the world’s entire electricity consumption...


...more than the country of Switzerland uses over the same time period...

but as bad as the above is consider the following :

...the electricity wasted each year by always-on but inactive electronic devices in the US could power the Bitcoin network four times over...


One percent of the entire worlds electricity consumption is taken up by "always on but inactive" electronic devices in the USA!!!

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/bitcoin-consumes-more-energy-than-switzerland-according-to-new-estimate/ar-AADR3c2?ocid=spartandhp

Did my good deed: I unplugged the wall wart to my electric shaver and toothbrush which, if everyone does their part, will save the planet from the expected collapse in the year 2100. I could start using that sun dial I have in the garden and power off all my clocks. Unfortunately, the HOA does not allow roosters so I need at least one for an alarm.

Just read where the Russian submarine that caught on fire a few days ago was suspected of mapping internet cables so they could easily be cut. I think there are more immediate problems to worry about.

Carbon Dioxide footprints:

crypto mining: 22-23 megatons
https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-generates-more-carbon 1-emissions-than-some-countries-study-warns

Streaming Adult Video (porn): 100 megatons
https://sputniknews.com/science/201907131076235927-porn-carbon-dioxide-emissions-research/

that puts porn at the same level as "inactive but always on" USA electronic devices. I suspect porn affects the brain the same way.

Gridcoin is a decent approach but they do a lot of frivolous work, e.g. collatz conjecture. The biggest problem is there is no demand for GRC and the price is heading to zero. Perhaps if a philanthropist wanted to encourage distributed computing they could buy GRC and burn them.

Obyte née ByteBall has another approach using the World Community Grid. Earn a billion bytes and you might be able to buy lunch if you find someone to convert them.

The biggest problem is that researchers availing themselves of BOINC or Folding@home distributed computing resources want to perpetuate the fallacy that computing resources are "spare" and free. They don't want to divert any funding from themselves to pay for the kindness of strangers. Until scientists wake up to the reality of how much money is being donated to them and start to support reimbursing crunchers for their electric bills nothing will ever come of this.

---

if researchers had to pay for users electricity they'd take the crunching private and there'd be no more project for users. They turn to BOINC because they often have no extra funding for computing. Some projects are funded by project admins w/o grants or outside funding.