|
Title: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: yumei on October 05, 2014, 02:37:33 PM Preventing Asic mining after next halving would solve a lot of problems.
Actually we are in a phase of centralising the bitcoin network, from individuals to companies belonging big asic farms. Satoshi for sure never planned asic mining. 99% of the bitcoin community would benefit when asic mining is prohibited. Without asic mining we would never have such a bump and dump scenario we have actually. Big asic farm holder selling their bitcoins to be able to pay the electrician and to cut out competition due low efficiency of mining. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: DannyHamilton on October 05, 2014, 03:11:06 PM Preventing Asic mining after next halving would solve a lot of problems. No, it wouldn't. Actually we are in a phase of centralising the bitcoin network, from individuals to companies belonging big asic farms. I don't think I'd call that "centralizing". Perhaps you mean to say "consolidating"? Satoshi for sure never planned asic mining. He certainly planned for consolidation of full nodes, and for the vast majority of users to run SPV clients. 99% of the bitcoin community would benefit when asic mining is prohibited. I'm not sure how you think you are going to "prohibit" the creation and use of Application Specific Integrated Circuits, but I suspect that any method you think should be used either wouldn't work or would simply result in a less secure network. Without asic mining we would never have such a bump and dump scenario we have actually. I don't think you know what the phrase pump and dump (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pump_and_dump) means. Perhaps you should take some time and do a little bit of learning before you try to make accusations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pump_and_dump Big asic farm holder selling their bitcoins to be able to pay the electrician and to cut out competition due low efficiency of mining. Yes, that is how capitalism and incentive works. So long as there is a profit to be earned, there is an incentive to increase the amount of mining. Mining will consolidate with those that have access to the cheapest resources since they can maintain a profit while all others are pushed out of the market. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: yumei on October 05, 2014, 03:39:07 PM Quote Quote from: yumei on Today at 02:37:33 PM Actually we are in a phase of centralising the bitcoin network, from individuals to companies belonging big asic farms. I don't think I'd call that "centralizing". Perhaps you mean to say "consolidating"? Actually there are less miners then we had 1 year before. I donīt have exact stats but I am guessing that 4-5 big asic farming companys control the market while one year ago it was spread into 1000 of miners. This is centralization for me. Quote Quote from: yumei on Today at 02:37:33 PM Satoshi for sure never planned asic mining. He certainly planned for consolidation of full nodes, and for the vast majority of users to run SPV clients. So when 4-5 big mining farms control the full hashing power this is for you consolidation. Consolidation means to do something solid or firm; solidify; strengthen: , this is the wikipedia translation of this word. Quote Quote from: yumei on Today at 02:37:33 PM 99% of the bitcoin community would benefit when asic mining is prohibited. I'm not sure how you think you are going to "prohibit" the creation and use of Application Specific Integrated Circuits, but I suspect that any method you think should be used either wouldn't work or would simply result in a less secure network. You could enable only script mining like litecoins, I am not affine with the developing structure behing that, but there are altcoins where you canīt asic mine. Quote Without asic mining we would never have such a bump and dump scenario we have actually. I don't think you know what the phrase pump and dump means. Perhaps you should take some time and do a little bit of learning before you try to make accusations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pump_and_dump This kind of dumping we have right now would never happend without asic mining, because without asic mining there were 1000 of miners sharing their mining earnings. Actually there are only some big farms who mine the mayor part of bitcoins and control the market. They can move the markets dramaticly. Quote Big asic farm holder selling their bitcoins to be able to pay the electrician and to cut out competition due low efficiency of mining. Yes, that is how capitalism and incentive works. So long as there is a profit to be earned, there is an incentive to increase the amount of mining. Mining will consolidate with those that have access to the cheapest resources since they can maintain a profit while all others are pushed out of the market. This is not capitalism, this is monopolism. You have some companys create new asic hardware, this companys mine thereself or sell their main parts to just 4-5 big companys. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: DannyHamilton on October 05, 2014, 03:59:48 PM Actually there are less miners then we had 1 year before. I donīt have exact stats but I am guessing that 4-5 big asic farming companys control the market while one year ago it was spread into 1000 of miners. This is centralization for me. Then perhaps you need to purchase a dictionary. Quote Quote Quote from: yumei on Today at 02:37:33 PM Satoshi for sure never planned asic mining. He certainly planned for consolidation of full nodes, and for the vast majority of users to run SPV clients. So when 4-5 big mining farms control the full hashing power this is for you consolidation. Consolidation means to do something solid or firm; solidify; strengthen: , this is the wikipedia translation of this word. http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/consolidate Quote 1. (transitive, intransitive) To combine into a single unit; to group together or join. 2. To make stronger or more solid. There are two definitions listed here. You are looking at the wrong one. I am using the word "consolidate" for it's first meaning: "To combine into a single unit; to group together or join." Quote Quote Quote from: yumei on Today at 02:37:33 PM 99% of the bitcoin community would benefit when asic mining is prohibited. I'm not sure how you think you are going to "prohibit" the creation and use of Application Specific Integrated Circuits, but I suspect that any method you think should be used either wouldn't work or would simply result in a less secure network. You could enable only script mining like litecoins, I am not affine with the developing structure behing that, but there are altcoins where you canīt asic mine. You are mistaken. There are scrypt mining ASICs for litecoins. The main reason that other altcoins don't yet have ASIC is that there isn't enough value in those scamcoins and crapcoins to make it worth the effort for someone to design an ASIC chip for them. Quote Quote Without asic mining we would never have such a bump and dump scenario we have actually. I don't think you know what the phrase pump and dump means. Perhaps you should take some time and do a little bit of learning before you try to make accusations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pump_and_dump This kind of dumping we have right now would never happend without asic mining, because without asic mining there were 1000 of miners sharing their mining earnings. Actually there are only some big farms who mine the mayor part of bitcoins and control the market. They can move the markets dramaticly. Dumping occurs when those holding bitcoins feel that they can get more value for their bitcoins by exchanging them now than they can by exchanging or using them later. If there were 1000's more miners than there are, then you could have 1000's of people exchanging their bitcoins. Quote Quote Big asic farm holder selling their bitcoins to be able to pay the electrician and to cut out competition due low efficiency of mining. Yes, that is how capitalism and incentive works. So long as there is a profit to be earned, there is an incentive to increase the amount of mining. Mining will consolidate with those that have access to the cheapest resources since they can maintain a profit while all others are pushed out of the market. This is not capitalism, this is monopolism. You have some companys create new asic hardware, this companys mine thereself or sell their main parts to just 4-5 big companys. Again I think you need a dictionary. I don't think you know what the word monopoly means. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: shorena on October 05, 2014, 04:03:42 PM Quote Quote from: yumei on Today at 02:37:33 PM Actually we are in a phase of centralising the bitcoin network, from individuals to companies belonging big asic farms. I don't think I'd call that "centralizing". Perhaps you mean to say "consolidating"? Actually there are less miners then we had 1 year before. I donīt have exact stats but I am guessing that 4-5 big asic farming companys control the market while one year ago it was spread into 1000 of miners. This is centralization for me. My guess is that you confuse pools with miners and mining farms. Just because there are "only" 4-5 big pools, does not mean that all their hashing power belongs to them. -snip- You could enable only script mining like litecoins, I am not affine with the developing structure behing that, but there are altcoins where you canīt asic mine. An ASIC is just a special purpise chip that does what a general purpose chip (CPU, GPU) does, but with higher energy efficiency and usually faster. There is no real way to prevent special hardware. There are litecoin (or better scrypt) ASICs. IMHO if a coin has no ASIC or GPU support yet its not because its not possible, but because its to expensive because the value per coin is not high enough. -snip- This kind of dumping we have right now would never happend without asic mining, because without asic mining there were 1000 of miners sharing their mining earnings. Actually there are only some big farms who mine the mayor part of bitcoins and control the market. They can move the markets dramaticly. What makes you think that its miners that sell coins atm? Why not those two brothers? -snip- This is not capitalism, this is monopolism. You have some companys create new asic hardware, this companys mine thereself or sell their main parts to just 4-5 big companys. Again, assumptions, gueswork. Do you have at least signs that your claims are true? Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: Rannasha on October 05, 2014, 04:15:29 PM This is not capitalism, this is monopolism. You have some companys create new asic hardware, this companys mine thereself or sell their main parts to just 4-5 big companys. There are only 2 companies producing high-end GPUs (AMD, Nvidia) and only 2 companies producing high-end CPUs (Intel, AMD) in large volume. In theory, if cryptocurrency gains worldwide adoption, the potential for mining to become dominated by a single manufacturer is far larger with CPU or GPU mining than it is with ASIC mining. The reason AMD didn't corner the mining market back when GPU mining was all the rage is that it simply wasn't worth the effort back then. Who knows what the future would've brought in an ASIC-less world? Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: yumei on October 05, 2014, 04:46:04 PM Quote Quote from: yumei on Today at 03:39:07 PM Actually there are less miners then we had 1 year before. I donīt have exact stats but I am guessing that 4-5 big asic farming companys control the market while one year ago it was spread into 1000 of miners. This is centralization for me. Then perhaps you need to purchase a dictionary. What is so hard to understand that actually a small rate of asic holders are mining all amount of bitcoins, 2 years ago it were tausends of miners mining the amount of bitcoins. And 1000 of miners are unlikely selling all their bitcoins at once like its happening now. Quote Quote 1. (transitive, intransitive) To combine into a single unit; to group together or join. 2. To make stronger or more solid. There are two definitions listed here. You are looking at the wrong one. I am using the word "consolidate" for it's first meaning: "To combine into a single unit; to group together or join." Bitcoins are not designed for being mined from a small group of investors having the money and the power producing and generating the mayor part of bitcoins. Quote Quote from: yumei on Today at 03:39:07 PM Quote Quote Quote from: yumei on Today at 02:37:33 PM 99% of the bitcoin community would benefit when asic mining is prohibited. I'm not sure how you think you are going to "prohibit" the creation and use of Application Specific Integrated Circuits, but I suspect that any method you think should be used either wouldn't work or would simply result in a less secure network. You could enable only script mining like litecoins, I am not affine with the developing structure behing that, but there are altcoins where you canīt asic mine. You are mistaken. There are scrypt mining ASICs for litecoins. The main reason that other altcoins don't yet have ASIC is that there isn't enough value in those scamcoins and crapcoins to make it worth the effort for someone to design an ASIC chip for them. Well like I said i am not technic affine, but honestly I think I understand more about economics then you. If this is true then POW in this initial form is the problem. Quote Quote from: yumei on Today at 03:39:07 PM Quote Quote Big asic farm holder selling their bitcoins to be able to pay the electrician and to cut out competition due low efficiency of mining. Yes, that is how capitalism and incentive works. So long as there is a profit to be earned, there is an incentive to increase the amount of mining. Mining will consolidate with those that have access to the cheapest resources since they can maintain a profit while all others are pushed out of the market. This is not capitalism, this is monopolism. You have some companys create new asic hardware, this companys mine thereself or sell their main parts to just 4-5 big companys. Again I think you need a dictionary. I don't think you know what the word monopoly means. mo·nop·o·lize (m-np-lz) tr.v. mo·nop·o·lized, mo·nop·o·liz·ing, mo·nop·o·liz·es 1. To acquire or maintain a monopoly of. 2. To dominate by excluding others: monopolized the conversation. Why you are insulting me, you seems like having no clue about economics but acting like you know. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: yumei on October 05, 2014, 04:48:43 PM Quote Quote from: yumei on Today at 03:39:07 PM This is not capitalism, this is monopolism. You have some companys create new asic hardware, this companys mine thereself or sell their main parts to just 4-5 big companys. There are only 2 companies producing high-end GPUs (AMD, Nvidia) and only 2 companies producing high-end CPUs (Intel, AMD) in large volume. In theory, if cryptocurrency gains worldwide adoption, the potential for mining to become dominated by a single manufacturer is far larger with CPU or GPU mining than it is with ASIC mining. The reason AMD didn't corner the mining market back when GPU mining was all the rage is that it simply wasn't worth the effort back then. Who knows what the future would've brought in an ASIC-less world? Well AMDn NVIDIA Intel are not producing for cryptocoins only, better said they donīt even plan with buyers from this markets. But asic manufactorer just produce for mining bitcoins. They will produce and mine theirself or sell to their best partners (selling more, buying high amounts, long term), this is how economic works. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: DannyHamilton on October 05, 2014, 05:12:35 PM Quote Quote 1. (transitive, intransitive) To combine into a single unit; to group together or join. 2. To make stronger or more solid. There are two definitions listed here. You are looking at the wrong one. I am using the word "consolidate" for it's first meaning: "To combine into a single unit; to group together or join." Bitcoins are not designed for being mined from a small group of investors having the money and the power producing and generating the mayor part of bitcoins. Actually, that is exactly how bitcoin was designed. Satoshi said so himself. Quote Quote Quote from: yumei on Today at 03:39:07 PM Quote Quote Quote from: yumei on Today at 02:37:33 PM 99% of the bitcoin community would benefit when asic mining is prohibited. I'm not sure how you think you are going to "prohibit" the creation and use of Application Specific Integrated Circuits, but I suspect that any method you think should be used either wouldn't work or would simply result in a less secure network. You could enable only script mining like litecoins, I am not affine with the developing structure behing that, but there are altcoins where you canīt asic mine. You are mistaken. There are scrypt mining ASICs for litecoins. The main reason that other altcoins don't yet have ASIC is that there isn't enough value in those scamcoins and crapcoins to make it worth the effort for someone to design an ASIC chip for them. Well like I said i am not technic affine, Clearly. but honestly I think I understand more about economics then you. It's possible, but given your ability to understand anything you've commented on so far, I doubt it. If this is true then POW in this initial form is the problem. POW is currently the best known solution to the byzantine generals problem. If you have a better solution, let me know. Quote Quote Quote from: yumei on Today at 03:39:07 PM Quote Quote Big asic farm holder selling their bitcoins to be able to pay the electrician and to cut out competition due low efficiency of mining. Yes, that is how capitalism and incentive works. So long as there is a profit to be earned, there is an incentive to increase the amount of mining. Mining will consolidate with those that have access to the cheapest resources since they can maintain a profit while all others are pushed out of the market. This is not capitalism, this is monopolism. You have some companys create new asic hardware, this companys mine thereself or sell their main parts to just 4-5 big companys. Again I think you need a dictionary. I don't think you know what the word monopoly means. mo·nop·o·lize (m-np-lz) tr.v. mo·nop·o·lized, mo·nop·o·liz·ing, mo·nop·o·liz·es 1. To acquire or maintain a monopoly of. 2. To dominate by excluding others: monopolized the conversation. Sorry. I thought you used the word "monopolism" (which is a noun meaning the existence or prevalence of monopolies), not "monopolize" (which is a verb that can either describe the act of maintaining a monopoly OR can describe the act of excluding others). A monolopy is the exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade. Regardless, in general use (at least in the English language here in the U.S.), a monopoly is when a SINGLE entity is in control of an overwhelming majority of something. If you have two or more entities, that is not a monopoly. That is healthy competition between multiple entities, and is how capitalism generally operates. Even within capitalism, monopolies can occur. Without regulation, as long as the monopoly supplies a desired product or service at an acceptable price, the monopoly can continue to exist indefinitely. If the monopoly attempts to use their control of the market to provide reduced value at an increased price, then they open themselves up to competition from others. If you don't like the idea of free market forces controlling the system and you prefer some sort of regulation to prevent consolidation of mining, then you aren't going to like Bitcoin very much. Why you are insulting me, you seems like having no clue about economics but acting like you know. I'm doing the best to answer your questions, correct your mistakes, and point out that your trolling FUD is rather ridiculous. The crap you are spewing here has been stated and debunked hundreds of times on this forum. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: andytoshi on October 05, 2014, 05:52:11 PM Sigh, ASIC hardness has been discussed ad nauseum. It is neither possible nor desirable. (https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/asic-faq.pdf)
Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: yumei on October 05, 2014, 07:02:46 PM Quote I'm doing the best to answer your questions, correct your mistakes, and point out that your trolling FUD is rather ridiculous. The crap you are spewing here has been stated and debunked hundreds of times on this forum All I am trying is to argue that asic mining is not a good thing for the community. Its neither trolling or ridiculous. If there is any chance to get back into CPU / GPU mining it would do things better. Thanks for the link andytoshi Seems like they have at least the same understanding about the words I was using before and not like the ignorant guy DannyHamilton. Quote However, ASICs bring with them a risk of manufacturer centralization, such as what we saw with Bitcoin in the early days of ASIC mining. Market forces eventually broke this monopoly 8 , and one thing which sped up the process is that Bitcoin uses the SHA2 hash- ing algorithm, which was designed for easy development of dedicated hardware. Therefore, relatively little startup capital is needed to develop Bitcoin ASICs Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: andytoshi on October 05, 2014, 07:19:15 PM Seems like they have at least the same understanding about the words I was using before and not like the ignorant guy DannyHamilton. DannyHamilton has gone above and beyond the call of duty for a number of years now, providing detailed, thoughtful, consistently correct advice on this forum. He has a wide understanding of Bitcoin's operation and explains things in great detail, often even to users who are clearly unwilling to invest a fraction of the time reading his posts that he spends writing them. There is an overwhelming amount of repetitive and ill-advised material on this board and it handling it would be far more hopeless without him. It is easy to become frustrated in such a situation, and also difficult to communicate tone through a text-based medium, so I hope you will give him the benefit of the doubt in future. And do not call him ignorant. That is not only untrue, but uncivil conduct. This sort of behaviour is why more knowledgable people won't take the time to participate on this board, and is detrimental to everyone. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: yumei on October 05, 2014, 07:45:35 PM Well he might have knowledge but he is clearly ignorant, because he has his own opinion and donīt respect other kind of opinions, plus he is insulting me.
"and point out that your trolling FUD is rather ridiculous. The crap you are spewing here has been stated and debunked hundreds of times on this forum" Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: kokojie on October 05, 2014, 09:24:34 PM Preventing Asic mining after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Actually we are in a phase of centralising the bitcoin network, from individuals to companies belonging big asic farms. Satoshi for sure never planned asic mining. 99% of the bitcoin community would benefit when asic mining is prohibited. Without asic mining we would never have such a bump and dump scenario we have actually. Big asic farm holder selling their bitcoins to be able to pay the electrician and to cut out competition due low efficiency of mining. ASIC is not the problem, GPU mining would have ended up exactly the same given enough time. Mega GPU mining farms will inevitable rise. PoW concept itself is a doomed concept. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: btchris on October 05, 2014, 10:00:06 PM Seems like they have at least the same understanding about the words I was using before and not like the ignorant guy DannyHamilton. DannyHamilton has gone above and beyond the call of duty for a number of years now, providing detailed, thoughtful, consistently correct advice on this forum. He has a wide understanding of Bitcoin's operation and explains things in great detail, often even to users who are clearly unwilling to invest a fraction of the time reading his posts that he spends writing them. <clip> Not that my opinion accounts for too much... but YES, absolutely this ^^^ At the risk of being argumentative, the problem of mining pools, or rather of poorly implemented mining pools, does exist. It's not something that I've pointed out, but rather something that gmaxwell (et al.) has pointed out many times (most recently here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=786716.0)). This has nothing to do with ASIC vs "ASIC-resistant", but it has everything to do with centralized mining, and the way in which most miners unfortunately choose to participate in it today. PoW concept itself is a doomed concept. You're welcome to propose a superior alternative, but you must back that alternative up with more that just your personal opinion. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: yumei on October 05, 2014, 10:22:04 PM Quote ASIC is not the problem, GPU mining would have ended up exactly the same given enough time. Mega GPU mining farms will inevitable rise. PoW concept itself is a doomed concept. This is exactly what I am not thinking! Just imagine GPU mining farms, even if their are farms, you can let your servers or home computer mine while using them for something else as well. You can buy GPU hardware anywhere and there is no risk that nvidia mine thereself, there is no monopol. I bet we didnīt have the low prices we have right now with GPU mining only. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: yumei on October 05, 2014, 10:30:49 PM Isnīt it theoretically possible to build a algorithm which makes actual asic miners worthless. Some kind of a script which change itself every period of time and would require other sort of asic miner, just to prevent asic miners?
Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: btchris on October 05, 2014, 10:43:46 PM Isnīt it theoretically possible to build a algorithm which makes actual asic miners worthless. No. An ASIC is just a computer. It's more specialized than a general-purpose computer, but in the end it's still just a computer. Any algorithm that can be implemented in a general purpose computer can be implemented in an ASIC, there's nothing "magical" going on. A relatively simple algorithm, like SHA-256, can be implemented in a general-purpose computer, or in an ASIC, with relatively little cost. This makes mining relatively accessible (though not necessarily profitable) to everyone. A more complicated algorithm would take more effort to implement in a general-purpose computer, and likewise more effort to implement in an ASIC. In the beginning, this makes mining more accessible to those with general-purpose computers. If there's enough demand (if the coin in question becomes popular enough), then eventually the algorithm will be implemented in an ASIC, but due to it's complexity it will be accessible to fewer people. In other words, the more complex the coin, the larger the start-up costs, and the less accessible mining becomes. This is exactly the opposite of what I assume is your goal. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: cr1776 on October 05, 2014, 11:23:00 PM Seems like they have at least the same understanding about the words I was using before and not like the ignorant guy DannyHamilton. DannyHamilton has gone above and beyond the call of duty for a number of years now, providing detailed, thoughtful, consistently correct advice on this forum. He has a wide understanding of Bitcoin's operation and explains things in great detail, often even to users who are clearly unwilling to invest a fraction of the time reading his posts that he spends writing them. There is an overwhelming amount of repetitive and ill-advised material on this board and it handling it would be far more hopeless without him. It is easy to become frustrated in such a situation, and also difficult to communicate tone through a text-based medium, so I hope you will give him the benefit of the doubt in future. And do not call him ignorant. That is not only untrue, but uncivil conduct. This sort of behaviour is why more knowledgable people won't take the time to participate on this board, and is detrimental to everyone. This. If you want to discuss a technical topic, it is important to be precise. Danny is quite good at ensuring discussions are well defined and has provided a lot of useful information while others just tune out. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: AniceInovation on October 05, 2014, 11:51:25 PM Is there a chance to bring back mining to the normal user now?
(Yes, very generic question, hope to have several points of view on that topic) Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: cr1776 on October 06, 2014, 12:47:47 AM Is there a chance to bring back mining to the normal user now? (Yes, very generic question, hope to have several points of view on that topic) This assumes "normal" users are not miming now, I think plenty are in the pools. But... 1. Buy an ASIC miner :-) . Anyone can. 2. Soon, the ASICs will hit the wall of silicon like CPUs and GPUs are so you won't see orders of magnitude improvements like between CPU -> GPU -> FPGA -> ASIC. When that happens you'll see much slower hash rate increases like differences between GPU generations. Sure, the hash rate was growing, just slower. Even getting a next gen ASIC might only buy you a small percentage gain which will make it easier to predict return vs orders of magnitude. Just like you don't see computers speed up two orders of magnitude in a year, hash rate growth will slow. Perhaps then more "normal" users will mine. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: -ck on October 06, 2014, 06:20:50 AM Satoshi for sure never planned asic mining. 99% of the bitcoin community would benefit when asic mining is prohibited. The current system where every user is a network node is not the intended configuration for large scale. That would be like every Usenet user runs their own NNTP server. The design supports letting users just be users. The more burden it is to run a node, the fewer nodes there will be. Those few nodes will be big server farms. The rest will be client nodes that only do transactions and don't generate. While not explicitly stating asics, he did describe very well the move to large farms doing all the mining, and asics are just a natural evolution all of us anticipated. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: MaxDZ8 on October 06, 2014, 06:29:04 AM ASIC is not the problem, GPU mining would have ended up exactly the same given enough time. Mega GPU mining farms will inevitable rise. I think it is worth noticing as long as computation stays in the real of mass-produced hardware, it keeps pouring money in a pressure cooker which will help other applications as well. At the very least, financing new process nodes in volumes. I think there's considerable value in keeping stuff on general hardware.Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: yumei on October 06, 2014, 10:59:38 AM Quote Quote from: yumei on October 05, 2014, 10:30:49 PM Isnīt it theoretically possible to build a algorithm which makes actual asic miners worthless. No. An ASIC is just a computer. It's more specialized than a general-purpose computer, but in the end it's still just a computer. Any algorithm that can be implemented in a general purpose computer can be implemented in an ASIC, there's nothing "magical" going on. A relatively simple algorithm, like SHA-256, can be implemented in a general-purpose computer, or in an ASIC, with relatively little cost. This makes mining relatively accessible (though not necessarily profitable) to everyone. A more complicated algorithm would take more effort to implement in a general-purpose computer, and likewise more effort to implement in an ASIC. In the beginning, this makes mining more accessible to those with general-purpose computers. If there's enough demand (if the coin in question becomes popular enough), then eventually the algorithm will be implemented in an ASIC, but due to it's complexity it will be accessible to fewer people. In other words, the more complex the coin, the larger the start-up costs, and the less accessible mining becomes. This is exactly the opposite of what I assume is your goal.Quote from: yumei on October 05, 2014, 10:30:49 PM Isnīt it theoretically possible to build a algorithm which makes actual asic miners worthless. No. An ASIC is just a computer. It's more specialized than a general-purpose computer, but in the end it's still just a computer. Any algorithm that can be implemented in a general purpose computer can be implemented in an ASIC, there's nothing "magical" going on. A relatively simple algorithm, like SHA-256, can be implemented in a general-purpose computer, or in an ASIC, with relatively little cost. This makes mining relatively accessible (though not necessarily profitable) to everyone. A more complicated algorithm would take more effort to implement in a general-purpose computer, and likewise more effort to implement in an ASIC. In the beginning, this makes mining more accessible to those with general-purpose computers. If there's enough demand (if the coin in question becomes popular enough), then eventually the algorithm will be implemented in an ASIC, but due to it's complexity it will be accessible to fewer people. In other words, the more complex the coin, the larger the start-up costs, and the less accessible mining becomes. This is exactly the opposite of what I assume is your goal. But you can not mine litecoins with this generation of ASIC, am I right? Because litecoin is not SHA-256? So the ASIC we have are not simple computer, they are just working with SHA-256 system, with all SHA-256 crypto systems? Then there should be a possiblity to build an algorithm into the bitcoins sourcecode which prevent ASIC miner. There should be enough good scripter here to be able to answer this question. Quote Quote from: yumei on October 05, 2014, 02:37:33 PM Satoshi for sure never planned asic mining. 99% of the bitcoin community would benefit when asic mining is prohibited. Quote from: satoshi on July 29, 2010, 02:00:38 AM The current system where every user is a network node is not the intended configuration for large scale. That would be like every Usenet user runs their own NNTP server. The design supports letting users just be users. The more burden it is to run a node, the fewer nodes there will be. Those few nodes will be big server farms. The rest will be client nodes that only do transactions and don't generate. While not explicitly stating asics, he did describe very well the move to large farms doing all the mining, and asics are just a natural evolution all of us anticipated. I described before the difference between normal GPU farms and ASIC farms. Asic Manufactorer would primary produce for themself and mine thereself if its worth. See BFL, just imagine you are a ASIC manufactorer, you would mine yourself, you would sell to your partners (which pay more or buy anything you have) and maybe at least or the garbage you would sell to normal consumers. The Asic Manufactorer have a monopol, they can do what they want. This is not free marke!!! With GPU manufactorer we donīt have such problems, because the manufactorers producing them for the whole world and that for more then decades, every computer needs a graphic cards. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: kokojie on October 06, 2014, 01:13:30 PM Quote ASIC is not the problem, GPU mining would have ended up exactly the same given enough time. Mega GPU mining farms will inevitable rise. PoW concept itself is a doomed concept. This is exactly what I am not thinking! Just imagine GPU mining farms, even if their are farms, you can let your servers or home computer mine while using them for something else as well. You can buy GPU hardware anywhere and there is no risk that nvidia mine thereself, there is no monopol. I bet we didnīt have the low prices we have right now with GPU mining only. You don't get it, the specific algorithm of PoW mining doesn't matter at all, there will always be an expense associated with it, and it can not cheap in order to secure the network. It doesn't matter whether it's ASIC mining or GPU mining, hundreds of millions of dollars must be spent on PoW mining every year, in order to secure the network. We would have the exact same low price right now, if we were GPU mining, the expense does not change. The only way to avoid this expense, is to fade out PoW mining altogether, and change to a PoS system. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: naplam on October 06, 2014, 06:22:34 PM The only way to avoid this expense, is to fade out PoW mining altogether, and change to a PoS system. Which comes with its own set of problems and is not ready to be a real replacement for PoW as it is implemented now in several coins. Until PoS is improved, a PoW/S combination that lowers the mining expense while keeping a similar level of security would be beneficial though.Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: yumei on October 06, 2014, 07:46:48 PM Quote Quote from: yumei on October 05, 2014, 10:22:04 PM Quote ASIC is not the problem, GPU mining would have ended up exactly the same given enough time. Mega GPU mining farms will inevitable rise. PoW concept itself is a doomed concept. This is exactly what I am not thinking! Just imagine GPU mining farms, even if their are farms, you can let your servers or home computer mine while using them for something else as well. You can buy GPU hardware anywhere and there is no risk that nvidia mine thereself, there is no monopol. I bet we didnīt have the low prices we have right now with GPU mining only. You don't get it, the specific algorithm of PoW mining doesn't matter at all, there will always be an expense associated with it, and it can not cheap in order to secure the network. It doesn't matter whether it's ASIC mining or GPU mining, hundreds of millions of dollars must be spent on PoW mining every year, in order to secure the network. We would have the exact same low price right now, if we were GPU mining, the expense does not change. The only way to avoid this expense, is to fade out PoW mining altogether, and change to a PoS system. O.k this is my last post for this thread, regardless of your bad behaviour, either I can not describe correctly or you donīt want to understand. I will explain it again. Actually the amount of miners is a lot less of what we had before Asic mining, who wants to buy a asic without knowing he will get it before next years, without knowing if his asic miner is not already old and slow until he gets it, without knowing how much asic in the same time will be purchased by company xy with best contacts to asic manufactorer zy. This problems you wonīt have with GPU. So lets say the amount of people mining is actually only 10% of what we had with GPU mining. Lets say instead of 10000 miners we have only 1000 miners, so we have a centralization of mining. So a small amount of people have more power about the system, this is also called monopolization. So for instance 100 (10% of miners) people can do a lot more harm when they decide to sell their mined coins, then 100 (1% of miners) people could do before Asic mining. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: kokojie on October 07, 2014, 12:46:42 AM The only way to avoid this expense, is to fade out PoW mining altogether, and change to a PoS system. Which comes with its own set of problems and is not ready to be a real replacement for PoW as it is implemented now in several coins. Until PoS is improved, a PoW/S combination that lowers the mining expense while keeping a similar level of security would be beneficial though.Yes, a hybrid system probably is required for some time to eventually fade out PoW Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: andytoshi on October 07, 2014, 03:58:28 AM The only way to avoid this expense, is to fade out PoW mining altogether, and change to a PoS system. Proof of stake has been shown to be unusable as a distributed consensus mechanism. (https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/pos.pdf) Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: amaclin on October 07, 2014, 03:23:40 PM Quote PoW concept itself is a doomed concept. No. Decentralization itself is doomed because of less efficiency of energy consuming. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: amaclin on October 07, 2014, 03:28:14 PM Quote Proof of stake has been shown to be unusable as a distributed consensus mechanism. (https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/pos.pdf) Proof-of-work has the same flaw: Some time miners are forced to switch off their asic-devices. Because they are unprofitable. After that PoW loses the security because it can be possible to buy switched-off hardware for zero price, switch it on for an hour and gain 51% Sorry. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: naplam on October 09, 2014, 12:08:11 PM Quote Proof of stake has been shown to be unusable as a distributed consensus mechanism. (https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/pos.pdf) Proof-of-work has the same flaw: Some time miners are forced to switch off their asic-devices. Because they are unprofitable. After that PoW loses the security because it can be possible to buy switched-off hardware for zero price, switch it on for an hour and gain 51% Sorry. Sorry. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: amaclin on October 09, 2014, 12:22:18 PM Quote No, you can't mine at zero cost (electricity??). The W stands for work ;) work costs I haven't been a miner. (OK, I switched on setgenerate option once or twice for an hour just for fun on my PC)I am not a miner. I will not mine. No expenses :) Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: DannyHamilton on October 09, 2014, 01:16:12 PM Quote No, you can't mine at zero cost (electricity??). The W stands for work ;) work costs I haven't been a miner. (OK, I switched on setgenerate option once or twice for an hour just for fun on my PC)I am not a miner. I will not mine. No expenses :) Correct. No mining, no POW expenses. But as soon as you try to mine (for a 51% attack), expenses are involved. The security model provided by POW is that it is more profitable to use your mining power to support the network than it is to use the mining power to attack the network. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: kokojie on October 09, 2014, 01:22:04 PM Quote No, you can't mine at zero cost (electricity??). The W stands for work ;) work costs I haven't been a miner. (OK, I switched on setgenerate option once or twice for an hour just for fun on my PC)I am not a miner. I will not mine. No expenses :) Correct. No mining, no POW expenses. But as soon as you try to mine (for a 51% attack), expenses are involved. The security model provided by POW is that it is more profitable to use your mining power to support the network than it is to use the mining power to attack the network. Ok, that really explains why all these PoW altcoins being 51% attacked to death, and all these PoS altcoin never attacked. Because PoW has a laughable and failed security model. It's just a matter of time Bitcoin will be attacked by a well funded and determined attacker. PoW security is a joke. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: amaclin on October 09, 2014, 01:24:04 PM Quote The security model provided by POW is that it is more profitable to use your mining power to support the network than it is to use the mining power to attack the network. This is true only while the difficulty is growing. ;DTitle: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: DannyHamilton on October 09, 2014, 01:45:30 PM Correct. No mining, no POW expenses. But as soon as you try to mine (for a 51% attack), expenses are involved. The security model provided by POW is that it is more profitable to use your mining power to support the network than it is to use the mining power to attack the network. Ok, that really explains why all these PoW altcoins being 51% attacked to death, Yes, those scams, pump-and-dump schemes, and other trash all failed to secure enough "work" to secure their system prior to launch. No surprise at what happened next there. and all these PoS altcoin never attacked. I wan't aware that there haven't been any attacks on any POS yet. Interesting. Once there actually is an attempted attack, let me know how it works out. Because PoW has a laughable and failed security model. Seems to be working fine for bitcoin for 6 years now. Bitcoin has survived many attempted attacks. It's just a matter of time Bitcoin will be attacked by a well funded and determined attacker. The longer that attacker waits, the more expensive that attack is going to be. I look forward to seeing what happens. PoW security is a joke. Perhaps, perhpas not. Either way, it doesn't have anything to do with the flaws in POS. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: amaclin on October 09, 2014, 01:53:33 PM Quote Seems to be working fine for bitcoin for 6 years now. Bitcoin has survived many attempted attacks. It is not a proof. Thousands of years people were told that an Earth is based on a tortoise.Quote The longer that attacker waits, the more expensive that attack is going to be. This is true only while the difficulty is growing. ;DQuote Perhaps, perhpas not. Either way, it doesn't have anything to do with the flaws in POS. The flaw is in decentralization itself. Once the cost becomes too high for supporting it for "good" user. And cheap enough for an attacker.And it is the same flaw in PoS/PoW/Proof-of-anything Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: DannyHamilton on October 09, 2014, 02:11:00 PM Quote Seems to be working fine for bitcoin for 6 years now. Bitcoin has survived many attempted attacks. It is not a proof. Thousands of years people were told that an Earth is based on a tortoise.Certainly. The "proof" is in the math that demonstrates the security model. The same math that demonstrates the problem with POS. Quote The longer that attacker waits, the more expensive that attack is going to be. This is true only while the difficulty is growing. ;DTrue. And right now, it is still growing. Therefore, right now, the longer that attacker waits the more expensive that attack is going to be. Quote Perhaps, perhpas not. Either way, it doesn't have anything to do with the flaws in POS. The flaw is in decentralization itself. Once the cost becomes too high for supporting it for "good" user. And cheap enough for an attacker.It's an interesting experiment, isn't it? I can't wait to see how it plays out. I tend to believe that the market forces and incentives are such that it will always be more profitable to participate than to attack. I guess all we can do is wait a few decades and see. And it is the same flaw in PoS/PoW/Proof-of-anything Certainly, but some systems (such as POS) have additional flaws that allow an attack with little or no cost at all.Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: lucasjkr on October 09, 2014, 02:14:43 PM This is not capitalism, this is monopolism. You have some companys create new asic hardware, this companys mine thereself or sell their main parts to just 4-5 big companys. There are only 2 companies producing high-end GPUs (AMD, Nvidia) and only 2 companies producing high-end CPUs (Intel, AMD) in large volume. In theory, if cryptocurrency gains worldwide adoption, the potential for mining to become dominated by a single manufacturer is far larger with CPU or GPU mining than it is with ASIC mining. The reason AMD didn't corner the mining market back when GPU mining was all the rage is that it simply wasn't worth the effort back then. Who knows what the future would've brought in an ASIC-less world? That argument doesn't work; even with the switch to ASICs, either intel or Amd could corner the mining market in a heartbeat if they so desired; no, they wouldn't be able to do so using off the shelf parts, but designing a processor to the the sha hashing is well within either companies abilities, and producig said chips.... Either could produce enough capacity to dominate the mining market without batting an eye. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: amaclin on October 09, 2014, 02:19:28 PM Quote It's an interesting experiment, isn't it? I can't wait to see how it plays out. I tend to believe that the market forces and incentives are such that it will always be more profitable to participate than to attack. I guess all we can do is wait a few decades and see. As for me: it was a very interesting experiment. It proved once again that people think only about profits and can forget about everything else. Math, physics, principles... I think that we will see the results of this not in decades, but in months or even weeks. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: DannyHamilton on October 09, 2014, 02:25:14 PM Quote It's an interesting experiment, isn't it? I can't wait to see how it plays out. I tend to believe that the market forces and incentives are such that it will always be more profitable to participate than to attack. I guess all we can do is wait a few decades and see. As for me: it was a very interesting experiment. It proved once again that people think only about profits and can forget about everything else. Correct. Bitcoin was specifically designed with this concept. Offer profits to secure the network. Eventually rely on fees to pay for it. As long as a significant percentage of the world population is greedy, bitcoin works. I think that we will see the results of this not in decades, but in months or even weeks. So, we can return to this conversation in a year and see if you were right? Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: amaclin on October 09, 2014, 02:37:50 PM Quote True. And right now, it is still growing. Therefore, right now, the longer that attacker waits the more expensive that attack is going to be. The main idea is that... I do not know how to explain math of it in English...The cost for attack is not a continuous function. It grows and right now it is very high. But one moment in future it will rapidly fall to zero. Quote Offer profits to secure the network. This has no sense. Securing has a cost. Either you secure the network, or you gain profits.This is a law of nature. Quote As long as a significant percentage of the world population is greedy, bitcoin works. No. It is only a ponzi where the next levels of pyramid give their funds to early adopters.Quote So, we can return to this conversation in a year and see if you were right? I will be happy to talk about cryptography and ecdsa and math/physics itself with the people who really love them.Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: gmaxwell on October 09, 2014, 03:38:33 PM But one moment in future it will rapidly fall to zero. Similar to how one moment in the future people will stop posting half-informed hand-waving to this forum?You can keep asserting things like this-- but you've given no justification. There is no mechanism by which the security is expected to "rapidly fall to zero" known to me. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: naplam on October 09, 2014, 04:16:49 PM But one moment in future it will rapidly fall to zero. Similar to how one moment in the future people will stop posting half-informed hand-waving to this forum?You can keep asserting things like this-- but you've given no justification. There is no mechanism by which the security is expected to "rapidly fall to zero" known to me. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: amaclin on October 09, 2014, 04:23:46 PM Quote I don't know what he's talking about either, but I can think of scenarios where Bitcoin's security is compromised. Imagine a rapid price drop to $10 right now -say, as rapid as the rise from $10 a while ago, nothing more spectacular than that. All of a sudden, practically all mining operations cease because they're no longer profitable. But then there's tons of mining equipment left to perform attacks by mining for short periods of time. Yes. I say exactly these words. Sorry, my English is poor and some persons do not understand me. Thank you for your comment. Now let us think 1) what is the "critical" price for bitcoin for such scenario. $10? or $25? or $50? or $250? 2) should the price drop rapidly? what do we mean by "rapid price drop"? Losing 10% in a week is enough rapid? 3) what is the best strategy to the holders of large bitcoin stacks when the price is near to critical value? 3a) what is the best strategy for the holders of large amount of $ when bitcoin price is close to critical value? Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: cr1776 on October 09, 2014, 05:35:29 PM But one moment in future it will rapidly fall to zero. Similar to how one moment in the future people will stop posting half-informed hand-waving to this forum?You can keep asserting things like this-- but you've given no justification. There is no mechanism by which the security is expected to "rapidly fall to zero" known to me. The question is whether the current ongoing costs to run the miners are higher than the value of the bitcoin mined, not necessarily the sunk cost of purchasing it. That ongoing cost is actually quite low, so it seems unlikely that the fiat value of bitcoin would drop sufficiently to cause them to shut down the miners. It could drop enough so that new mining hardware's ROI isn't merely somewhat negative, but hugely negative in which case the manufacturers would have to drop their prices or be stuck with a lot of inventory. Likewise, if one assumed that the miners did shut down their hardware because even the ongoing costs were too high and dumped it at a loss, you (or someone else) might be able to purchase the miner at 5 cents on the dollar and for you a purchase at that price would be profitable and the miner would be back supporting the network. Just like no one would buy an Avalon 1 at its initial cost during the fall of 2013 because it would not have a positive ROI, but might if someone sold it for a penny. Then it might have covered its cost and been slightly profitable (or pick some other ASIC that fits that scenario, I didn't run the exact numbers for it.) Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: gmaxwell on October 09, 2014, 05:37:57 PM The security argument for Bitcoin works if you set the price of mining hardware to zero-- Bitcoin is proof of work, the input to work is _energy_. The security argument is generally insensitive to price except at the extreme limit of $0 (and there... there are more things to worry about than reorgs).
You have a mutually exclusive choice for what to do with your units of energy available to you. You can attack, devaluing the Bitcoin you gain from your attacks, or you can mine honestly and protect your existing Bitcoins and the new transaction fees you receive. The market price of Bitcoin has changed >10 fold in the past and there were no security incidents as a result. Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: amaclin on October 09, 2014, 06:10:41 PM Quote Likewise, if one assumed that the miners did shut down their hardware because even the ongoing costs were too high and dumped it at a loss, you (or someone else) might be able to purchase the miner at 5 cents on the dollar and for you a purchase at that price would be profitable and the miner would be back supporting the network. After I buy a 51% of switched off miners for 5 cents per THs I wouldn't support network. I will attack it! ;D No doubt! Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: DannyHamilton on October 09, 2014, 06:24:42 PM Quote Likewise, if one assumed that the miners did shut down their hardware because even the ongoing costs were too high and dumped it at a loss, you (or someone else) might be able to purchase the miner at 5 cents on the dollar and for you a purchase at that price would be profitable and the miner would be back supporting the network. After I buy a 51% of switched off miners for 5 cents per THs I wouldn't support network. I will attack it! ;D No doubt! That's ok, I'll buy them at 6 cents per THs and counter your attack. You lose. ;D Title: Re: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. Post by: amaclin on October 09, 2014, 06:49:52 PM Quote That's ok, I'll buy them at 6 cents per THs and counter your attack. What will you do with so much power? I do not understand. Will you support the network? It is absolutely the same as mining on cpu now.It is useless. You only support miners who have old hardware. In fact, I do not have funds for attack. But it doesn't mean that nobody has. |