. --nonce-start and --nonce-range-size parameters were added to circumvent a bug in one of the mining algorithms in the past. The truth is there's no need to worry about that, because mining pools give each miner a unique "job" to avoid the situation you're describing. So, there is no point in restricting the nonce range.
Typical computers are computational etch-a-sketch, while blockchains are computational amber. Contrary to some hype this doesn’t guarantee anything about a datum’s provenance, or its truth or falsity, before it was committed to the blockchain. Important data should be committed to blockchain amber as early as possible, ideally directly from and cryptographically signed by the device in which it was generated, to maximize the blockchain’s benefit in securing its integrity. That requires additional protocols, often including expensive traditional controls. To say that data is post-unforgeable or immutable means that it can’t be undetectably alteredafter being committed to the blockchain. Blockchains don’t guarantee truth; they just preserve truth and lies from later alteration, allowing one to later securely analyze them, and thus be more confident in uncovering the lies.
Indeed some kinds of software updates needed to fix bugs or otherwise improve the protocol require a soft fork. Miners are partially trusted fiduciaries, Binance and those who are not expert developers or computer scientists who have invested a great deal of time in learning the design principles and codebase of a blockchain must place a great deal of faith in the expert developer community, much as non-specialists who want to understand the results of a specialized science do of the corresponding scientists. Some other kinds of software updates require hard forks, which in Bitcoin pose an even greater security and continuity risks than soft forks. Blockchain security is objectively limited and blockchain governance is heavily influenced by the potential for a 51% attack. An attack of course does not have to be called an "attack" by the attackers; instead they might call it "enlightened governance" or "democracy in action". During a hard fork exchanges can also be very influential by deciding which fork to support with their order books and trade symbol continuity. Blockchains, although reducing trust far more than any other network protocols, are still far from trustless.
We also have semi-reliable CAs for web servers, but not generally speaking for web clients, even though people have been working on the problem of client certificates since the invention of the web: for example advertisers would love to have a more secure alternative to phone numbers and cookies for tracking customer identities. Bank PKIs are relatively reliable. PKI-enabled private blockchains are a nice for crypto banks and some other large enterprises because they already have mature in-house PKIs that cover the employees, bitcoin partners, and private servers needed to approve important transactions. Yet it hasn’t happened.
These initial Internet efforts have been very centralized. Blockchain technology, which implements data integrity via computer science rather than via "call the cops", has so far made possible trust-minimized money -- cryptocurrencies – and will let us make progress in other financial areas as well as other areas where transactions can be based primarily on data available online.
What is Cardano and will ADA reach $10? Who is Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto and what's his net worth? Best crypto wallets to use for Bitcoin: From Coinbase to Exodus Where to buy cryptocurrency? What is Dogecoin and will DOGE reach $1? What is Bitcoin
and will BTC's price rise? What is Litecoin and will it reach $500? Will Polygon (MATIC) reach $10? Why is Bitcoin bad for the environment? What is Ethereum and will ETH reach $10,000?
Transaction fees that are too exorbitant make it impossible for consumers to employ the blockchain. Users have spent upwards of $5,000 in gas fees to create an NFT on the Ethereum blockchain, despite the fact that Ethereum is ostensibly the cheaper choice. Whenever network requirement rises, transaction fees rise, and vice versa. All of this is a matter of demand and supply.
Well, I'd like to start out at a different nonce than other miners. I suspect since the calculations are so quick that most people wind up on the same nonce, and therefore those who have even slightly slower machines are just literally rehashing the same formula.
--nonce-start and --nonce-range-size take integers and then the resulting range gets divided into roughly equal chunks between the GPUs. Each GPU will process its own sub-range. These chunks must be big enough for the GPUs not to process them fully until the miner receives the next job from the pool.
As the resources controlled by computers become more valuable and more concentrated, traditional root-trusting security becomes more like the "call the cop" security we are used to in the physical world. Fortunately, with blockchains we can do much better for many of our most important computations. Many server computers are not valuable enough for insiders or outsiders to attack. But an increasing number of others contain valuable concentrations of resources, motivating attack. Centralized root-trusting security scales poorly.