i imagine n+1 is much faster than generating a large random number for each hash... | Hacker News

Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit

		shawabawa3 on Nov 25, 2013 \| parent \| context \| favorite \| on: AsicMiner's Immersion Cooling Mining Facility i imagine n+1 is much faster than generating a large random number for each hash. They probably generate a guid and then append a number and increment Whats the advantage of using a new random number each time?

wmf on Nov 25, 2013 [–]

Fun EE fact: An LFSR is cheaper than a counter.

joezydeco on Nov 25, 2013 | [–]

But an LFSR only gives you a pseudorandom result, right? I mean, I'd rather load thermal noise than use a shift.

wmf on Nov 25, 2013 | | [–]

For searching a 32-bit nonce space I'd rather use a PRNG than a true RNG to avoid wasting work due to birthday paradox collisions.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact