<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><title>BikesandBitcoin wrote</title><author_name>BikesandBitcoin (npub1fj…0vvj2)</author_name><author_url>https://yabu.me/npub1fjs9aprvqer6m3npqxfdh0gtflfvtxw5p7jldf4xywp7jtmz99lsr0vvj2</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://yabu.me</provider_url><html>Yes, good clarification and I think you&#39;re correct in a sense. Entropy would be a highly explanatory way to discuss hashing &#39;mattering&#39;. &#xA;&#xA;There is still the question of &#39;mattering to what end&#39;. &#xA;&#xA;Hashes &#39;matter to the end of building the chain&#39; to the extent they successfully find a golden nonce. (e.g. THE successful hash submits a block to the chain to build upon.)&#xA;&#xA;Hashes that do not succeed to that end do not matter in that sense. &#xA;&#xA;BUT, from the perspective of entropy, yes, all hashes matter as a MORE descriptive illustration than the poisson example given above....&#xA;&#xA;I&#39;d have to look more into how entropy units function because I understand the idea of entropy units per satoshi, but would want to clarify entropy units as a function of searching the field and not entropy as a function of energy input into machines. &#xA;&#xA;Thank you!</html></oembed>