Will ASIC be compatible forever ?

[zephram]

Hi,

I just just questioned myself, how long will ASIC machines like Avalon, Jalapeno etc stay compatible ? Will it still be usable after another Interface Update like Stratum ? Will it be still of use after a Hard Fork may be ? Will they have paid when this happens ?

Anyone reliable Information available ?

FPGA based stuff on the other hand will be software upgradable forever I think.

jm2p Zeph

[1714876807]

1714876807

[farproc]

ASIC will be compatible only if the hash function(SHA256 currently) does not change.

[poly]

ASIC will be compatible only if the hash function(SHA256 currently) does not change.

It might change in the future with a new block version if there are any weaknesses in dual step SHA256, but for the next decade, most likely not.

[vdragon]

Neo why the shouting?

[Fuzzy]

[troll]

Let me get that [ignore] for you.


And yes, the SHA256 fork (this original one) will always be compatible. So if someone hacks SHA256 (not in our lifetimes) these current BITCOIN ASICs will be worthless.

[NEO2012]

Neo why the shouting?

wat sahouting  im typing  silently so i dont wake up the dog

[Quix]

[troll]

Let me get that [ignore] for you.


And yes, the SHA256 fork (this original one) will always be compatible. So if someone hacks SHA256 (not in our lifetimes) these current BITCOIN ASICs will be worthless.

Seeing as SHA1 has already been compromised I expect we'll live to see SHA256 compromised, that if unless you happen to be 80+. It could take 10 years, or 10 minutes but I'm quite convinced I'll live to see it.

[Luke-Jr]

[troll]

Let me get that [ignore] for you.


And yes, the SHA256 fork (this original one) will always be compatible. So if someone hacks SHA256 (not in our lifetimes) these current BITCOIN ASICs will be worthless.

Seeing as SHA1 has already been compromised I expect we'll live to see SHA256 compromised, that if unless you happen to be 80+. It could take 10 years, or 10 minutes but I'm quite convinced I'll live to see it.

You need to compromise SHA256d, not just SHA256.

[Nikolaj06]

I was wondering the same, however from a different angle:

Will there be a super ASIC 2.0? With a similar gap like the one between FPGA and ASICs? Or do you predict there to be a much softer increase in efficiency (like the usual doubling in increase every 18 months)

[firefop]

I was wondering the same, however from a different angle:

Will there be a super ASIC 2.0? With a similar gap like the one between FPGA and ASICs? Or do you predict there to be a much softer increase in efficiency (like the usual doubling in increase every 18 months)

not really.

In the case of 120nm ASIC, the best you could hope for 14nm - so maybe an 85% better asic at some point in the future.

[Quix]

[troll]

Let me get that [ignore] for you.


And yes, the SHA256 fork (this original one) will always be compatible. So if someone hacks SHA256 (not in our lifetimes) these current BITCOIN ASICs will be worthless.

Seeing as SHA1 has already been compromised I expect we'll live to see SHA256 compromised, that if unless you happen to be 80+. It could take 10 years, or 10 minutes but I'm quite convinced I'll live to see it.

You need to compromise SHA256d, not just SHA256.

If anyone ever makes a quantum computer hash functions like the SHA series will be obsolete immediately. Either that or a vulnerability is found or rainbow tables are generated. A lot of things can happen in 10 years, especially in computers. Believe me when I say that Bitcoin is not going to work long-term without major changes to the system to keep up with technology on a regular basis.

[Luke-Jr]

[troll]

Let me get that [ignore] for you.


And yes, the SHA256 fork (this original one) will always be compatible. So if someone hacks SHA256 (not in our lifetimes) these current BITCOIN ASICs will be worthless.

Seeing as SHA1 has already been compromised I expect we'll live to see SHA256 compromised, that if unless you happen to be 80+. It could take 10 years, or 10 minutes but I'm quite convinced I'll live to see it.

You need to compromise SHA256d, not just SHA256.

If anyone ever makes a quantum computer hash functions like the SHA series will be obsolete immediately. Either that or a vulnerability is found or rainbow tables are generated. A lot of things can happen in 10 years, especially in computers. Believe me when I say that Bitcoin is not going to work long-term without major changes to the system to keep up with technology on a regular basis.

There is, at present, no reason to think quantum computers break SHA-2.

[VinceSamios]

[troll]

Let me get that [ignore] for you.


And yes, the SHA256 fork (this original one) will always be compatible. So if someone hacks SHA256 (not in our lifetimes) these current BITCOIN ASICs will be worthless.

Seeing as SHA1 has already been compromised I expect we'll live to see SHA256 compromised, that if unless you happen to be 80+. It could take 10 years, or 10 minutes but I'm quite convinced I'll live to see it.

You need to compromise SHA256d, not just SHA256.

If anyone ever makes a quantum computer hash functions like the SHA series will be obsolete immediately. Either that or a vulnerability is found or rainbow tables are generated. A lot of things can happen in 10 years, especially in computers. Believe me when I say that Bitcoin is not going to work long-term without major changes to the system to keep up with technology on a regular basis.

There is, at present, no reason to think quantum computers break SHA-2.

Unless we manage to create a quantum computer with the power of a billion stars... or something along those lines.

[Fuzzy]

[troll]

Let me get that [ignore] for you.


And yes, the SHA256 fork (this original one) will always be compatible. So if someone hacks SHA256 (not in our lifetimes) these current BITCOIN ASICs will be worthless.

Seeing as SHA1 has already been compromised I expect we'll live to see SHA256 compromised, that if unless you happen to be 80+. It could take 10 years, or 10 minutes but I'm quite convinced I'll live to see it.

No, you won't, just, no...

[AzN1337c0d3r]

Brute force attacks against 256-bit keys will be infeasible...

Of course this is the case, but what happens if some discovers a weakness that suddenly halves the key length? Suddenly you have a reduction of 2^128 the amount of work done. Cracking a 128-bit key isn't infeasible.

Things are impossible until they're not.

[peewee]

I think you've missed the point of quantum computing (at least the theory anyway)

It is not about brute force decryption and a quantum computer is able to consider multiple instances at the same time.  Liken this to being able to trace backwards the encryption algorithm used to encrypt the data...if every point down the road can be simultaneously compared, the last point that lead to the previous point can be discovered.   IF quantum computing ever becomes a reality even a basic quantum computer able to compare a handful of instances simultaneously would make quick work of any encryption sequence generated by a binary computer.   

Make no doubt about it...if quantum computers become a reality Bitcoin and the security of any computations done on conventional computers will break down in a hurry.

[Fuzzy]

Of course this is the case, but what happens if some discovers a weakness that suddenly halves the key length? Suddenly you have a reduction of 2^128 the amount of work done. Cracking a 128-bit key isn't infeasible.

Things are impossible until they're not.

I think you've missed the point of quantum computing (at least the theory anyway)

It is not about brute force decryption and a quantum computer is able to consider multiple instances at the same time.  Liken this to being able to trace backwards the encryption algorithm used to encrypt the data...if every point down the road can be simultaneously compared, the last point that lead to the previous point can be discovered.   IF quantum computing ever becomes a reality even a basic quantum computer able to compare a handful of instances simultaneously would make quick work of any encryption sequence generated by a binary computer.   

Make no doubt about it...if quantum computers become a reality Bitcoin and the security of any computations done on conventional computers will break down in a hurry.

Well IF IF IF an asteroid obliterates planet Earth, it's not gonna matter anyway...

[Luke-Jr]

I think you've missed the point of quantum computing (at least the theory anyway)

It is not about brute force decryption and a quantum computer is able to consider multiple instances at the same time.  Liken this to being able to trace backwards the encryption algorithm used to encrypt the data...if every point down the road can be simultaneously compared, the last point that lead to the previous point can be discovered.   IF quantum computing ever becomes a reality even a basic quantum computer able to compare a handful of instances simultaneously would make quick work of any encryption sequence generated by a binary computer.   

Make no doubt about it...if quantum computers become a reality Bitcoin and the security of any computations done on conventional computers will break down in a hurry.

Bitcoin does not use any encryption.

It does use cryptographic signatures, which are in this case vulnerable to quantum computers, but the hashing algorithm is not.
Any quantum upgrades will likely continue to use SHA256d as their proof-of-work.

[Bogart]

Interesting article here, though mostly focused on RSA:

http://www.askamathematician.com/2011/02/q-how-can-quantum-computers-break-ecryption/

[Quix]

I still maintain that the only constant in Computer Science is change. I'm absolutely certain that something will break the hashing scheme Bitcoin uses, and it won't be more than about 10 years from now. This cycle has repeated itself many times in the past. As an example, all the common cryptography techniques from 10 years ago have already been defeated.

P.S. Fuzzy, posting someone else's propaganda images is not an argument.