Timeline for Is it correct to refer to hashes found through proof of work as "proof of work numbers"?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 25, 2022 at 11:04 | vote | accept | StatsScared | ||
| May 25, 2022 at 9:36 | history | edited | RedGrittyBrick | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1043 characters in body
|
| May 25, 2022 at 9:36 | comment | added | RedGrittyBrick | @StatsScared: I have added to my answer something to address your edit to your question. | |
| May 25, 2022 at 9:31 | history | edited | RedGrittyBrick | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1043 characters in body
|
| May 25, 2022 at 2:58 | comment | added | StatsScared | @PieterWuille, the characterization of POW as a "specific data item" as opposed to a "general method". By others, I mean the community at large. I was wondering if there have been past discussions in the bitcoin community regarding the specifics of what the phrase "Proof of Work" refers to. | |
| May 16, 2022 at 12:15 | comment | added | Pieter Wuille | Which others? What characterization? Thisnis getting a bit vague.. | |
| May 15, 2022 at 17:05 | comment | added | StatsScared | I was def conflating POW as specific data item as opposed to an overall method. Is thinking of it as an overall method controversial though? In the sense that others have in the past objected to characterization? | |
| May 15, 2022 at 15:33 | history | answered | RedGrittyBrick | CC BY-SA 4.0 |