You spent two days generating a hash? What a waste of resources.
EDIT: harsh crowd today. I could care less how the author spends their time. Am I the only one that saw all the articles talking about how bad BTC is for the environment recently?
EDIT: harsh crowd today. I could care less how the author spends their time. Am I the only one that saw all the articles talking about how bad BTC is for the environment recently?
You don't get to judge, unless you want to detail what you did over the weekend and let the rest of us strangers decide if what you did was a waste or not.
> Doing one round of SHA-256 by hand took me 16 minutes, 45 seconds. At this rate, hashing a full Bitcoin block (128 rounds)[3] would take 1.49 days, for a hash rate of 0.67 hashes per day
It's for entertainment, and it looks like OP learned something. It's better use of resources than staring at a TV all day, which presumably you won't have an issue with.
>Am I the only one that saw all the articles talking about how bad BTC is for the environment recently?
At this point it's beating a dead horse.
You couldn't care less?
"Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something."
Also maybe I’m crazy but their comment seemed to be a joke/commentary on the environmental resources used by Bitcoin. That isn’t a shallow dismissal.
I take your point about the GP being a joke, though—the edit makes that clear. The problem with one-liners that don't disambiguate intent [3] is that they pattern-match to the most common category they look like.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/posts?id=dang
[2] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...
[3] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...
An entire comment that is just a joke is not how you end up with substantive discussion, which I think has been well proven by reddit long since.
It's fine to have a joke to lead into a well articulated point, but an entire comment shouldn't _just_ be a joke, unless it's the rare case of a joke that is insightful, not just a shared cultural reference (in this case to a common other argument on HN).
> Isn’t that kind of what you are doing by posting that comment?
I think this is akin to the paradox of tolerance.
There's the saying "that with is presented without evidence may be dismissed without evidence".
I think the HN analogue would be "that which is posted without an attempt to have a substantive discussion can be dismissed out of hand".
Similar to how a gish gallop works, it's absolutely not plausible for dang to respond to every comment that violates HN guidelines with a full breakdown of why he believes so. The volume of poor comments simply is so high that he would need to spend far more hours than he can spare for that.