Talk:Proof of work

message: * the "Reusable POW" section belongs to a page of its own, thus should be moved.
* this "POW" page should just focus on POW systems.
* it should point to applications/extentions such as "RPOW".
* the distinction (if any) between system/protocol/function should be clearer.
----
SuzieDerkins 18:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For schemes that require human interaction see CAPTCHA. Both proof-of-work system and CAPTCHAs are not symmetric in the sense that generating challenges is much easier than solving them. Therefore, inserting instructions in e-mail addresses does not seem to qualify for either of the two concepts. 85.0.104.237 (talk) 09:32, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: Sorry if I'm putting this comment in the wrong place: I'm a cryptographer (can be looked up by my username) and I stumbled across the fact that this page said "proof of work is a form of zero knowledge proof" in the first paragraph. This is factually incorrect. I edited the page to remove this misinfo (while unfortunately not logged in) and I wanted to leave this comment so that the change would not be reverted as vandalism. Thank you all. Matthew d green (talk) 18:33, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proof of work is not a zero knowledge proof 

message: The entire Reusable POW section looks like original research/self promotion. SuzieDerkins, as you contributed to it most, do you have a particular reason for including so much on one particular implementation? MarkSteward (talk) 23:08, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: "It is in fact the only form of digital token money invulnerable to inflation caused by greedy or untrustworthy mints issuing more tokens than they said they would issue."
What's that all about? I came to this page to read up on Internet security and suddenly it feels like I'm reading a blog written by  a bitcoin militant. Presuming it to be true, a neutral statement would say "It is the only form of..." , and would drop the word 'greedy' as it is a value judgement and is anyway covered by 'untrustworthy', which is itself not a neutral term, so 'unreliable' would be more objective.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vynbos (talk • contribs) 15:45, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There were issues of WP:NPOV, WP:RS and WP:UNDUE here, to varying degrees. I've trimmed the section as much as I can, stripping out the editorializing. I'm not a crypto hacker, so I can't speak to the technical accuracy. Yakushima (talk) 11:01, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Reusable proof-of-work

message: There's some back-and-forth on the article about adding material re: Cuckoo Cycle algo.   I'd suggest it be mentioned in the List of proof-of-work functions section.  Irrelevant of the authors editing of this article, his Cuckoo Cycle paper has been published in the "refereed proceedings of three workshops held at the 19th International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security, FC 2015, in San Juan, Puerto Rico, in January 2015"
, google scholar listing the paper with 7 citations, and received at least draft-level attention in one other academic paper.  -- 1Wiki8........................... (talk) 12:19, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cuckoo Cycle 

message: Thanks for helping preserve the Cuckoo Cycle citation.
To lend further support to the notability of this proof of work, I can mention the following:
Featured in Bitcoin Lecture 8 — Alternative Mining Puzzles 
at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TipGy2bOVL4
Cited on the authoritative http://hashcash.org/papers/
Cited in the Bitcoin: ASICs and Decentralization FAQ
at https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/asic-faq.pdf
Described as "current state-of-the-art in memory-hard PoW" on Vitalik Buterin's
Ethereum Blog at https://blog.ethereum.org/2014/06/19/mining/
Described in the blog post https://bytecoin.org/blog/proof-of-work-part-2/
Cited by the just-published http://eprint.iacr.org/2015/946
"Asymmetric proof-of-work based on the Generalized Birthday problem"  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tromp (talk • contribs) 21:48, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cuckoo Cycle author here 

message: — Assignment last updated by Sqlo123 (talk) 21:17, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - SU22 - Sect 202 - Tue