Well, well, well, now we know what Jihan Wu’s been up to.

[hardtime]

tl;dr for someone just learning of the controversy. Please correct if I make any factual errors.

Greg Maxwell discovered by reverse engineering that a Bitcoin ASIC manufacturer had implemented in hardware a covert, hard to detect version of the AsicBoost algorithm developed and patented by Timo Hanke. Proprietary software is needed to take advantage of the hardware boost and can result in an energy cost savings of up to 30% which is a huge advantage over competitors. Kyle Torpey claims that the ASIC manufacturer is Bitmain.

The covert version of AsicBoost is hard to detect but would explain the odd behaviour of mining empty blocks by Antpool. The improvement in energy use is countered by SegWit, which could explain why Bitmain has been so opposed to adoption of SegWit: it would neutralize the competitive advantage they have from their covert use of a patented technology.

The whole BU drama appears to be nothing but smoke to allow the manufacturer (Bitmain?) to enjoy an unfair advantage over the competition for as long as possible. Greg Maxwell is working on a BIP that would render the advantage useless. 

Yep this is going to pretty much all be right, I don't see it mentioned so I'll say it I think the AsicBoost was something that was documented in general but it hadn't been something that had been known to actually be in use. Thanks Maxwell and bringing to light the real reason for them Jihan Wu being so opposed to the implementation of Segwit as it's just going to destroy him and probably remove some 30 percent profits, hehe.

Pretty disgusting to see all of this opposition being down to money being made but I had been thinking this and it's a known point that money is usually the point behind most arguements. In this case, that wonderful point stands true.

Fuck a Roger Ver (he totally knew) and Fuck a Jihan Wu

SEGWIT MAKE BITCOIN GREAT AGAIN

[Killerpotleaf]

What I don't know is, can existing ASIC's switch over from the secret way to the obvious way? I don't see why not, but I'm not entirely sure.

you can't simple change the logic a ASIC runs, its burnt into the chip

Part of the logic of ASICBoost is done on a separate computer's CPU. There is preprocessing.

well thats the 50million dollar question, isnt it.

and hearing Gmax avoid the answering the question by saying " we aren't blocking boosting all together" ( which is clearly bullshit, he has every intention to totally block boosting of any kind, it says so in his email ) seems to suggest it will brick there current hardware

[FiendCoin]

Hilarious, from Reddit:

A list of all the BU supporter concocted conspiracies that turned out to all be true of Bitmain and BU.

They would never stop to think that there is now a provable motive to show that their poster child of BU support was doing so for so many of the reasons they have hated, derided, and absolutely lambasted Blockstream for.

So, Blockstream is holding back bitcoin scaling so they can profit from their centralized product?
• Nope, that was Bitmain

So, SegWit is just overly complex code to sneak in discounts for Blockstream's "products"?
• Nope... that was Bitmain realizing SegWit negated their already profitable discount and ruined their product.

So Blockstream wants the bitcoin market to be centralized through a few central companies and hubs?
• Nope, that was Bitmain that wanted to maintain centralization of mining hardware and hashing power through their company and hubs.

So, Blockstream is centralized development and wants everyone to run the code that makes their company valuable?
• Nope, it is Bitmain that supports any competing client, regardless of the effect on Bitcoin, in order to maintain the code that is specifically profitable for them and them alone.


https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/63qaps/a_list_of_all_the_bu_supporter_concocted/

[iamnotback]

My understanding from the paper is that the proposed segwit BIP will render obsolete only the covert version of ASICboost, not the overt portion.


https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/63otrp/gregory_maxwell_major_asic_manufacturer_is/dfvvhvn/

We, in particular I, am not. This proposal does not prevent ASICBOOST, it only interferes with the covert version and only to the extent that the covert version is incompatible with protocol upgrades.

The argument for blocking ASICBOOST outright is that a patent is a government granted monopoly and restrictive licensing of ASICBOOST is likely to result in an eventual monopoly in mining (because difficulty adjustments push mining to a break even equilibrium, so potentially all unboosted miners would operate at a loss). I share the concern but I do not consider it to be as serious an issue as the disruption to protocol upgrade capability.

If any parties who would be adversely impacted by this proposal would like to speak up, I would love to hear their arguments. My guess is that they will not want to admit to patent infringement in public, and so they will not.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/63otrp/gregory_maxwell_major_asic_manufacturer_is/dfvzklr/

You need to distinguish overt and covert boosting. The proposed BIP only addresses covert boosting.

If miners all used covert boosting Bitcoin could never gain, or gain only with significant increases complexity or loss of functionality many different protocol improvements, including:

(1) Segwit. (2) UTXO commitments. (non-delayed, at least) (3) Committed Bloom filters (4) Committed address indexes (5) STXO commitments (non-delayed). (6) Weak blocks (7) Most kinds of fraud proofs -- to state a few.

I don't fully understand how blocking the covert portion of ASICboost would affect mining performance on pre-existing hardware containing this feature. Whether you simply lose the increased efficiency (all S9's increase power consumption by 30%?) or reduces hashrate by 30%.

Either way, it is unlikely for Bitmain to side with any proposal that will effectively neuter their hardware and cost them 10's or more millions of dollars per year, and disrupt sales.  Especially if they are unable to openly admit that such technology is in fact in their ASIC's due to patent infringement.  So where does that leave us, omit their hashrate while taking block signalling into account and force a hardfork, or concede that you cannot circumvent a player like themselves from the table and find a compromise?

maxell tends to say things that while perfectly true, are misleading...

2 bloody paragraphs and we still dont have a clue if this BIP would brick there hardware, or simply make their advantage useless.

Note the proposed BIP is not SegWit. It is a separate BIP to force the boosting to be overt. I have asked Gmaxwell a question:

Is it likely that your BIP would cripple the existing hardware with the covert boost? Could the covert boost be reconfigured with s/w upgrade to run in overt mode? Separately, if the boosting circuit can't be used anymore, is the entire ASIC chip useless or can the chip route around the boosting optimization without crippling efficiency worse than just losing the boost efficiency?

In other words, is your BIP proposing to cripple existing hardware?

[Killerpotleaf]

i bet most asic used today are Boosting, and possibly ignoring the pending-chain-patent

segwit coreBIP??? will break some 80% of hashing power.

[iamnotback]

Hilarious, from Reddit:

A list of all the BU supporter concocted conspiracies that turned out to all be true of Bitmain and BU.

They would never stop to think that there is now a provable motive to show that their poster child of BU support was doing so for so many of the reasons they have hated, derided, and absolutely lambasted Blockstream for.

So, Blockstream is holding back bitcoin scaling so they can profit from their centralized product?
• Nope, that was Bitmain

So, SegWit is just overly complex code to sneak in discounts for Blockstream's "products"?
• Nope... that was Bitmain realizing SegWit negated their already profitable discount and ruined their product.

So Blockstream wants the bitcoin market to be centralized through a few central companies and hubs?
• Nope, that was Bitmain that wanted to maintain centralization of mining hardware and hashing power through their company and hubs.

So, Blockstream is centralized development and wants everyone to run the code that makes their company valuable?
• Nope, it is Bitmain that supports any competing client, regardless of the effect on Bitcoin, in order to maintain the code that is specifically profitable for them and them alone.


https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/63qaps/a_list_of_all_the_bu_supporter_concocted/

Well there is a distinction. Miners can compete to copy what Bitmain has done. Patents can be avoided with jurisdiction, secrecy, and possibly small innovation tweaks which bypass patent claims.

Whereas, if Blockstream has control over Bitcoin, nobody can compete with them.

Thus Blockstream will be pushed on to Litecoin. It's happening right now.

[AgentofCoin]

i bet most asic used today are Boosting, and possibly ignoring the pending-chain-patent

segwit coreBIP??? will break some 80% of hashing power.

I would suspect pro-SegWit miners are likely not using the ASICBoost as they would
have likely followed Antpool. But, its possible all non-SegWit miners are using this
implementation.

[Finksy]

Given the economic scale of what is at risk in the ASICBoost debate, (this might sound crazy), would it be feasible to offer suitable fee to open-source the ASICboost technology from Hanke and Lerner, in order to level out the playing field?  Whether it come from a community funded project, or otherwise?  If everyone had access to it (much like advancements in ASIC technology), then the advantage is only to those who implement it successfully.  And those rules have been played by since the first ASIC was used in mining.

[Killerpotleaf]

Note the proposed BIP is not SegWit. It is a separate BIP to force the boosting to be overt. I have asked Gmaxwell a question:

SegWit has to play a role in breaking "covert" (aka as publicly patented) boosting, everyone's going on and on about how this is the reason why they oppose SegWit.

[kiklo]

maxell tends to say things that while perfectly true, are misleading...

2 bloody paragraphs and we still dont have a clue if this BIP would brick there hardware, or simply make their advantage useless.

There are two ways to do ASICBoost, the obvious way anyone can detect by looking at the blockchain, or the secret way.

The secret way doesn't work with segwit, it also causes miners to occasionally do strange things, like mine empty blocks. Antpool has been spotted doing these strange things, which implies they are currently doing this the secret way. They didn't want people to find out they were doing this.

The BIP gmaxwell proposes breaks the secret way from working. ASICboost can still work using the obvious way, and the obvious way works with segwit and doesn't do strange things.

What I don't know is, can existing ASIC's switch over from the secret way to the obvious way? I don't see why not, but I'm not entirely sure.

IMO the should just block the entire optimization. Patents in mining hardware create monopolies.

You know G.Maxwell Lies , Right?

Example : he claims it is a secret technique,

ASICS BOOST WHITEPAPER DATED MARCH 31, 2016
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1604/1604.00575.pdf

The AsicBoost method is based on a new way to process work items inside and outside of the Bitcoin mining ASIC.
It involves a new design of the SHA 256 hash­engines (inside the ASIC)
and an additional pre­processing step as part of the mining software (outside the ASIC). The
result is a performance improvement of up to 20% achieved through a reduction of gate count
on the silicon. The purpose of this paper is to present the idea behind the method and to
describe the information flow in implementations of AsicBoost
​

Strange, it has been in a Whitepaper that it was inside the ASICS for over a year.
But G.Maxwell claims it was a secret, well LIARS do that. 

 

[ebliever]

Hilarious, from Reddit:

A list of all the BU supporter concocted conspiracies that turned out to all be true of Bitmain and BU.

They would never stop to think that there is now a provable motive to show that their poster child of BU support was doing so for so many of the reasons they have hated, derided, and absolutely lambasted Blockstream for.

So, Blockstream is holding back bitcoin scaling so they can profit from their centralized product?
• Nope, that was Bitmain

So, SegWit is just overly complex code to sneak in discounts for Blockstream's "products"?
• Nope... that was Bitmain realizing SegWit negated their already profitable discount and ruined their product.

So Blockstream wants the bitcoin market to be centralized through a few central companies and hubs?
• Nope, that was Bitmain that wanted to maintain centralization of mining hardware and hashing power through their company and hubs.

So, Blockstream is centralized development and wants everyone to run the code that makes their company valuable?
• Nope, it is Bitmain that supports any competing client, regardless of the effect on Bitcoin, in order to maintain the code that is specifically profitable for them and them alone.


https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/63qaps/a_list_of_all_the_bu_supporter_concocted/

This gives us a good example of the phenomena of "Projection" - ie., where BU supporters were accusing the Core development community of all the unethical (and illegal so far as patent infringement goes) schemes of their own group.

Will be interesting to see the public reaction of the patent holders of the ASICBOOST exploit - since G. Maxwell's post makes it clear they were made aware of the hardware exploit. If I was Jihan and company I'd stop screwing around deleting tweets (as reported on reddit) and be lawyering up right now.

[iamnotback]

The whole BU drama appears to be nothing but smoke to allow the manufacturer (Bitmain?) to enjoy an unfair advantage over the competition for as long as possible. Greg Maxwell is working on a BIP that would render the advantage useless.  

Pretty disgusting to see all of this opposition being down to money being made but I had been thinking this and it's a known point that money is usually the point behind most arguements. In this case, that wonderful point stands true.

All you communists are going to be pushed onto to Litecoin with your fellow communist/fascist @gmaxwell, where you belong. Bitcoin will remain immutable and reliable protocol where the free market is free to compete in all its ugly but efficient glory.

Will be interesting to see the public reaction of the patent holders of the ASICBOOST exploit - since G. Maxwell's post makes it clear they were made aware of the hardware exploit. If I was Jihan and company I'd stop screwing around deleting tweets (as reported on reddit) and be lawyering up right now.

You're hoping China will enforce a Western patent, which then means China's government can have a monopoly on covert boosting.

Jihan Wu has tried to defeat patents. I have to congratulate him on that aspect. Also he has defeated Blockstream's attempt to turn Bitcoin into a communist/socialist/experimental clusterfuck and made Bitcoin more immutable. The guy is becoming a hero.

I hope he wasn't stupid enough to really believe that BU was a sound direction forward. I think likely he was just bluffing. He apparently did try to prevent Litecoin from getting SegWit also, so not sure if this means he has a covert boosting for Scrypt also (which seems unlikely).

A judgement against them in the US would destroy their business, they wouldn't chance it.

That is far from certain also.

I expect support for this improvement to be beyond overwhelming, but we'll see.

I think you better scurry off over to Litecoin where you belong. You are soon going to find out that Bitcoin is immutable. Satoshi (Nash) designed it that way. If you want your democratic communist/socialist clusterfuck, then you'll have it on Litecoin, except the Chinese are going to be your bosses. Well they already are aren't they.

I think it is cut and dry. A proof of work is supposed to prove work, if you come up with a shortcut that is an attack-- normally it's not a major attack because the defacto algorithm gets updated with that technique and the playing field is level again. In this case it can't be particularly because the covert technique strongly interferes with the operation of the protocol.
Lets consider a hypothetical. Say someone found a way to mine with 50% of the power usage but it required that they only mine empty blocks (or, perhaps, blocks with just a couple transactions). If left unaddressed this would significantly disrupt the network. Would you not consider it an attack?

The free market has to deal with patents. They are part of the landscape. Putting some humans in charge of deciding what is fair and not fair competition is turning Bitcoin into a government.

The intent of the protocol is the protocol, not your misinterpretations of what the game theory should be. If the protocol could be changed every time someone discovered a proprietary (secret or otherwise) advantage, then we've reduced Bitcoin's value to that of a bankrupt democracy. The protocol trusts the free market to work it out. Now I do happen to believe Satoshi's design is a winner-take-all, but making tweaks as you propose with this BIP will not fix the fundamental winner-take-all economics. So we might as well leave Bitcoin's protocol as it is, so it can be a known stable thing. Small blocks are fine. You can scale on Litecoin, we've worked to active SegWit for you there. The door is open, take it.

[Killerpotleaf]

The whole BU drama appears to be nothing but smoke to allow the manufacturer (Bitmain?) to enjoy an unfair advantage over the competition for as long as possible. Greg Maxwell is working on a BIP that would render the advantage useless.  

Pretty disgusting to see all of this opposition being down to money being made but I had been thinking this and it's a known point that money is usually the point behind most arguements. In this case, that wonderful point stands true.

All you communists are going to be pushed onto to Litecoin with your fellow communist/fascist @gmaxwell, where you belong. Bitcoin will remain immutable and reliable protocol where the free market is free to compete in all its ugly but efficient glory.

Will be interesting to see the public reaction of the patent holders of the ASICBOOST exploit - since G. Maxwell's post makes it clear they were made aware of the hardware exploit. If I was Jihan and company I'd stop screwing around deleting tweets (as reported on reddit) and be lawyering up right now.

You're hoping China will enforce a Western patent, which then means China's government can have a monopoly on covert boosting.

Jilian Wu has tried to defeat patents. I have to congratulate him on that aspect. Also he has defeated Blockstream's attempt to turn Bitcoin into a communist/socialist/experimental clusterfuck and made Bitcoin more immutable. The guy is becoming a hero.

I hope he wasn't stupid enough to really believe that BU was a sound direction forward. I think likely he was just bluffing. He apparently did try to prevent Litecoin from getting SegWit also, so not sure if this means he has a covert boosting for Scrypt also (which seems unlikely).

A judgement against them in the US would destroy their business, they wouldn't chance it.

That is far from certain also.

I expect support for this improvement to be beyond overwhelming, but we'll see.

I think you better scurry off over to Litecoin where you belong. You are soon going to find out that Bitcoin is immutable. Satoshi (Nash) designed it that way. If you want your democratic communist/socialist clusterfuck, then you'll have it on Litecoin, except the Chinese are going to be your bosses. Well they already are aren't they.

you got some balls man! 

[anonymoustroll420]

You know G.Maxwell Lies , Right?

Example : he claims it is a secret technique,

ASICS BOOST WHITEPAPER DATED MARCH 31, 2016
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1604/1604.00575.pdf

The AsicBoost method is based on a new way to process work items inside and outside of the Bitcoin mining ASIC.
It involves a new design of the SHA 256 hash­engines (inside the ASIC)
and an additional pre­processing step as part of the mining software (outside the ASIC). The
result is a performance improvement of up to 20% achieved through a reduction of gate count
on the silicon. The purpose of this paper is to present the idea behind the method and to
describe the information flow in implementations of AsicBoost
​

Strange, it has been in a Whitepaper that it was inside the ASICS for over a year.
But G.Maxwell claims it was a secret, well LIARS do that.  

 

The method described in the paper is publicly detectable on the blockchain.

The method miners are using is not publicly detectable, it's secret.

I heard about this happening months ago, I've been telling people:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/630ue1/someone_hacked_major_mining_operations_and_their/dfqyixr/?context=1

[Killerpotleaf]

we take core's rightful place as bitcoin's overseer to be self evident, and would ask it exercises it mighty power to vanquish those who would oppose us.

[iamnotback]

you got some balls man!  

My view is PoW is a winner-take-all. I showed the math for that recently. And that can't be avoided.

So my view is to protect the value of Bitcoin, which is its immutability and reliability. And send Core over to Litecoin so they can work on scaling.

And then I will go back to my programming cave and work on replacing PoW with something that isn't a winner-take-all.

So my viewpoint is simply what I think will move everything forward most efficiently. I will be quite happy if Blockstream can't fuck with Bitcoin any more. But I also think they are contributing some useful experimentation and should have their own altcoin to do that with. And with small blocks on Bitcoin, then Litecoin will receive a lot of the scaling (as well maybe some other altcoins).

It seems to all make sense to me that this will be the outcome.

The supreme whales of Bitcoin who no longer comment in this forum any more, want small blocks. Bitcoin to them is a settlement system for power brokers, not for the common man. For them, the reliability and immutability of Bitcoin is paramount. They own most of the Bitcoins, so they will decide if they want to kill a fork.

[Hueristic]

Fucking over everyone using bitcoin is great... Potential user sees a group that's able to game the system with an advantage, and want's to run the other way. Was it illegal, who knows. Amoral, unethical, fucked up central banker shit absolutely.

 
Well I would agree that given the context of Bitcoin that everyone should be able to compete fairly, a patent should be unenforceable, but I wouldn't blame Jihan for trying to mine.  Everyone using ASICs is trying to gain an advantage.

Ridiculous imo to try to change the PoW... its the last thing Core should be doing.

Having an exploit and using it is one thing. Especially when that thing is a sizeable advantage. But an entirely different thing to manipulate the environment, in order to maintain that advantage. You should evolve, not.stagnate everyone else.  I hate this about DC politics, hate to see it in BTC as well

Tell M$ that!

[danielW]

FUD.  Asicboost been known about for a long time and Bitmain holds the patent in China.

http://211.157.104.77:8080/sipo_EN/search/detail.do?method=view&parm=16b414c21a2f19d11b2c18401bcd1a5f183a19561ad91be11a501c4805792c231f5421b222572195236c20482755275723ca24be2221222525702494250d26c0274025822c3f29092a7c29a02d6d2d6f28fa2ed62bd12c892f482c34330947932f5c2c0a2ac731b9333c316c366534e7318235ee337934f1360837f03747371b371a34e231bf38f13b04390c3e0d3f6f39ea3dc63c573d6d3e683e4c26d918c33ffe3c523c273e354334405c47c545774302408e4423458d47b04688462b46a846c246aa436f47554bcc49784a2d

Just more distractions from king Gregory.

your link looks fishy no hostname? whatever
They Patented this?
so only they can produce chips with this hack-like-optimization?
we knew about this for how long?

Still nothing from the shills? Come on guys, I want your opinions  

BU shill here.

this is the free market at work... if you want to mine less effectively go ahead and mine with your CPU.
Its ALMOST as if they created a new chip that simply mines bitcoin more effectively and all of you are like WELL THAT'S UNFAIR!

2 issues

1) Its patented, selectively available and was secretly used, in a competitive industry like mining it gives huge advantage and has lead to centralisation of mining and could lead to even more centralisation. Centralisation of mining is not good for Bitcoin you agree? We should act to prevent centralisation of mining right?


2) The miner that has benefited from centralisation is now blocking a hugely beneficial protocol upgrade and capacity increase that is for the benefit of all Bitcoin holders. By blocking this they are improving their own financial position at the expense of holders and centralising bitcoin to their benefit further.

[kiklo]

You know G.Maxwell Lies , Right?

Example : he claims it is a secret technique,

ASICS BOOST WHITEPAPER DATED MARCH 31, 2016
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1604/1604.00575.pdf

The AsicBoost method is based on a new way to process work items inside and outside of the Bitcoin mining ASIC.
It involves a new design of the SHA 256 hash­engines (inside the ASIC)
and an additional pre­processing step as part of the mining software (outside the ASIC). The
result is a performance improvement of up to 20% achieved through a reduction of gate count
on the silicon. The purpose of this paper is to present the idea behind the method and to
describe the information flow in implementations of AsicBoost
​

Strange, it has been in a Whitepaper that it was inside the ASICS for over a year.
But G.Maxwell claims it was a secret, well LIARS do that.  

 

The method described in the paper is publicly detectable on the blockchain.

The method miners are using is not publicly detectable, it's secret.

I heard about this happening months ago, I've been trying to tell people:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/630ue1/someone_hacked_major_mining_operations_and_their/dfqyixr/?context=1

That is the dumbest thing , I have heard all day.

Do you know
Exactly how much each miner is paying for his electricity?
Whether or not he is stealing it or receiving it for Free from his mom, or a corrupt official?

You know why you don't know that because It does not fucking matter and really none of your business except for your own mining operations.
Electricity is an input cost , if someone found a cheaper more energy efficient way to mine, everyone should follow in their footsteps, not be a dumbass and claim it is a attack vector.

They should be trying to make the whole process more energy efficient, because those mining warehouses are causing an increase in electricity's prices in the areas they reside. Causing a hardship for the poor people in those areas, that start having to choose between electricity or food and medicine.
Pay attention to what matters here, the energy waste of ASICS can not be sustained and the poor are suffering because of it.
G.Maxwell is doing what he always does, lies to create FAKE propaganda.
List of his Lies so far.
1. BTC can not move to a faster block speed     : LIE
2: BTC can't increase Blocksize without segwit  : LIE
3: BTU is unsafe                                           : LIE
4: PoS: Nothing at Stake                                : LIE
5: Energy Efficiently is an attack vector            : LIE

What kind of moron thinks up that shit, and even scarier why does anyone even believe anything the guy even says.  

 

[danielW]

Now that Jihan and Bitmain have been outed as exploiting a vulnerability in Bitcoin's PoW and that SegWit would have made it impossible for them to continue exploiting this vulnerability the motivations for blocking SegWit and supporting BU have now become very clear. We're going to see a shift in SegWit support in Bitcoin very soon and LTC is also helping here by activating SegWit first. I can see some more room up for Litecoin until around 0.02 or $25, but this will change as soon as Bitcoin starts to make progress towards activating SegWit as well and people start moving back into BTC. If you think BTC will stay behind and never activate SW or LN you are sorely mistaken. Let's see what happens and see who turns out to be right.

We can't get 95% to activate SegWit on Bitcoin without Bitmain's approval. They have every right to protect their patent's value. Those who think Bitcoiners will rally to fight him are socialists and communists, who deny capitalism, game theory, and economic reality.

We can't lower the 95% threshold for Bitcoin, because it will cause too much risk and wild price swings.

Also we shouldn't be putting such experimental shit on Bitcoin. Bitcoin is supposed to remain reliable.

Sorry Bitcoin will remain unmodified, as Satoshi (aka Nash) intended its equilibrium game theory to be a clusterfuck of politics insuring the immutability of the protocol which is what gives Bitcoin its trust and value.

User activated soft fork will be the likely solution