|
|
|
|
|
|
by viraptor
3144 days ago
|
|
|
The comparisons fall short. - pixels are being optimised, with displays going closer and closer to true-off all the time - pixels: even whitespace is important next to information - RFC: we're wasting a few bits as a tradeoff for less complicated hardware and less processing power. Not sure if applicable anymore, but reserved fields and consistent parsing saved us some power/materials historically. - SSL provides security and privacy in your communication at a cost reasonable for the outcome. It's only logical they if we don't need to spend the energy to mine coins, we should stop doing that sooner then later. |
|
|
And protecting money is not important?
> - RFC: we're wasting a few bits as a tradeoff for less complicated hardware and less processing power. Not sure if applicable anymore, but reserved fields and consistent parsing saved us some power/materials historically.
Well so the RFC reserved bits are waste but also a benefit? Maybe the same is true w.r.t Bitcoin mining?
> - SSL provides security and privacy in your communication at a cost reasonable for the outcome.
The cost is reasonable in SSL case but unreasonable in Bitcoin case based on what criteria exactly? Remember that SSL relies on PKI that has a lot weaker security guarantees (see Symantec, DigiNotar and your favourite Chinese CA in your OS's trust store).