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

[iamnotback]

If you fork and bankrupt miners who bought hardware, Bitcoin can never again be trusted. It means Bitcoin is run by democracy and not by immutability. Satoshi (Nash) will roll over in his grave.

The whales of Bitcoin will destroy any such fork. I guarantee you that!

[1714644509]

1714644509

[1714644509]

1714644509

[1714644509]

1714644509

[Finksy]

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%, or renders it obsolete altogether.

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 infringementedit: BMT has patent on technology in China.  Whether this is legitimate or ethical I have no idea.  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?

[Paashaas]

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.

Dude, it's considered an attack because whoever gets this efficiency eventually out competes all other miners, making mining centralization the end result.
If any of the components which make bitcoin a truly decentralized P2P network is captured by any means, in this case centralization, then bitcoin looses it's fundamental properties. That's why ASICBOOST is considered an attack.

If you fork and bankrupt miners who bought hardware, Bitcoin can never again be trusted. It means Bitcoin is run by democracy and not by immutability. Satoshi (Nash) will roll over in his grave.

The whales of Bitcoin will destroy any such fork. I guarantee you that!

On the contrary, in this case those miners are corrupted. People will be relieved when they are gone.

[Slark]

Well, I can't say I am surprised by that turn of events. SegWit incompatibility with Bitmain miners, who would have thought...
For all of you crying that Chinese miners just wanted just to protect community from Core developers dictatorship - what do you say now?

I knew that economic whales/rich miners will dominate the bitcoin ecosystem no matter what and do whatever they want.

I wonder what will Bitmain's line of defense from now on will be.

[Killerpotleaf]

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.

[jonald_fyookball]

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.

Dude, it's considered an attack because whoever gets this efficiency eventually out competes all other miners, making mining centralization the end result.
If any of the components which make bitcoin a truly decentralized P2P network is captured by any means, in this case centralization, then bitcoin looses it's fundamental properties. That's why ASICBOOST is considered an attack.

thats why i said the patent should be unenforceable?   but lets be fair, if you blame Jihan for using legal measures to try to gain an advantage (patenting), why does Blockstream have sidechain patents and why are they employing the most influencial core devs who restrict blocksize while promoting off chain scaling, i mean, come on...

P.S. really fucking confusing you guys with the same shmeegal avaater, someone please fork lol

[GreenBits]

If you fork and bankrupt miners who bought hardware, Bitcoin can never again be trusted. It means Bitcoin is run by democracy and not by immutability. Satoshi (Nash) will roll over in his grave.

The whales of Bitcoin will destroy any such fork. I guarantee you that!

This is the other glaring point of it. The respect was hard fought, and the trust is barely there (we just got denied the ETF yet again). If majority of miners get burned because of a political decision, bitcoin will be passed over. We will go out like ETH went out with Slock.it, it wasn't a pretty thing. But ETH recovered, amazingly so. I don't think BTC would do as well. And some would call me a maximalist.

[AgentofCoin]

...
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?

If they placed their future in the hands of products that are dependent upon Bitcoin
not evolving in certain ways, and they would need to constantly block those ways into
the future, just to protect their risky gamble in such chips, then I say fuck them.

This shouldn't have been unexpected from these people, but we don't need to be
sympathetic toward them now. There is a cost when you play fast and loose.

If other miners are not complicit, I'm sure they will require a fix asap.

[iamnotback]

wait...
if his asicboost is rendered invalid, doesn't that make all his ASIC+asicboost hardware useless ( totally useless) ?

As I understand the whitepaper, yes it would because the logic gates for avoiding the optimization have been eliminated which makes it 20% more efficient.

All those who own Bitmain hardware for mining SHA2 coins, must fight SegWit.

Note someone disagrees with my assumption and I am asking for clarification:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/63otrp/gregory_maxwell_major_asic_manufacturer_is/dfvz5g2/

[Killerpotleaf]

If you fork and bankrupt miners who bought hardware, Bitcoin can never again be trusted. It means Bitcoin is run by democracy and not by immutability. Satoshi (Nash) will roll over in his grave.

The whales of Bitcoin will destroy any such fork. I guarantee you that!

without too much thought i tend to agree with you. this would be very similar to a POW change simple because china managed to out compete others.

suddenly the incentive to optimize minning operations kinda go out the window, and no one can take bitcoin seriously anymore.

so basically this means segwit is completely off the table.

if it activates then we do a chain split and dump the living crap out of the segwit chain.

[Yogafan00000]

Now we can add the name Wu to the growing list of Bitcoin villains.

[ebliever]

If you fork and bankrupt miners who bought hardware, Bitcoin can never again be trusted. It means Bitcoin is run by democracy and not by immutability. Satoshi (Nash) will roll over in his grave.

The whales of Bitcoin will destroy any such fork. I guarantee you that!

LOL, watching the diehards of BU flail in their death throes.

They are guilty of patent infringement. How much longer do you think they are going to be allowed to keep their mining equipment running if they are continuing to infringe?

The whales are busy on twitter, and by all accounts they rather disagree with you (besides Ver) ;-)

[iamnotback]

If you fork and bankrupt miners who bought hardware, Bitcoin can never again be trusted. It means Bitcoin is run by democracy and not by immutability. Satoshi (Nash) will roll over in his grave.

The whales of Bitcoin will destroy any such fork. I guarantee you that!

This is the other glaring point of it. The respect was hard fought, and the trust is barely there (we just got denied the ETF yet again). If majority of miners get burned because of a political decision, bitcoin will be passed over. We will go out like ETH went out with Slock.it, it wasn't a pretty thing. But ETH recovered, amazingly so. I don't think BTC would do as well. And some would call me a maximalist.

I wrote:

Why is taking advantage of an opportunity that is legal in the protocol sleazy? I think it is sleazy of you to disrespect what Bitcoin is, which is protocol that is the law. Bitcoin is not a democracy. Democracy is the problem we are trying to avoid with Bitcoin.

The whales of Bitcoin will bankrupt those who mine on some democratic attempt to fork the protocol without unanimous support. I had already explained in the past days how the whales can do this (and profit from doing by taking BTC away from all those fools who go on the democratic fork).

They are guilty of patent infringement. How much longer do you think they are going to be allowed to keep their mining equipment running if they are continuing to infringe?

The whales are busy on twitter, and by all accounts they rather disagree with you (besides Ver) ;-)

I never supported BU. What are you smoking dude.

Bitcoin's protocol doesn't give a shit about patents. And China doesn't respect Western patents either.

The largest whale of Bitcoin who has all the other significant whales in his WoT doesn't not do Twitter. You can find him at trilemma.com

He was also the DAO attacker.

And he thinks Gmaxwell is a duplicitous idiot and told him that he is a slave.

Y'all will be crying to moma.

All other pools agree to activate segwit at 95% minus the hash percentage of the corrupt pool.

That is communism. If you disrespect Bitmain's right to act in the free market, and gang up together to launch an attack on Bitcoin's immutability, then the whales of Bitcoin will destroy your illegal fork and take your BTC from you. The protocol is the law. Bitcoin's protocol doesn't give a shit about patents. And China doesn't give a shit about Western patents. And socialists/collectivists are what Bitcoin is destroying. Do you know who the real whales of Bitcoin are?

[quake313]

If you fork and bankrupt miners who bought hardware, Bitcoin can never again be trusted. It means Bitcoin is run by democracy and not by immutability. Satoshi (Nash) will roll over in his grave.

The whales of Bitcoin will destroy any such fork. I guarantee you that!

This is the other glaring point of it. The respect was hard fought, and the trust is barely there (we just got denied the ETF yet again). If majority of miners get burned because of a political decision, bitcoin will be passed over. We will go out like ETH went out with Slock.it, it wasn't a pretty thing. But ETH recovered, amazingly so. I don't think BTC would do as well. And some would call me a maximalist.

I wrote:

Why is taking advantage of an opportunity that is legal in the protocol sleazy? I think it is sleazy of you to disrespect what Bitcoin is, which is protocol that is the law. Bitcoin is not a democracy. Democracy is the problem we are trying to avoid with Bitcoin.

The whales of Bitcoin will bankrupt those who mine on some democratic attempt to fork the protocol without unanimous support. I had already explained in the past days how the whales can do this (and profit from doing by taking BTC away from all those fools who go on the democratic fork).

They are guilty of patent infringement. How much longer do you think they are going to be allowed to keep their mining equipment running if they are continuing to infringe?

The whales are busy on twitter, and by all accounts they rather disagree with you (besides Ver) ;-)

Bitcoin's protocol doesn't give a shit about patents. And China doesn't respect Western patents either.

The largest whale of Bitcoin who has all the other significant whales in his WoT doesn't not do Twitter. You can find him at trilemma.com

He was also the DAO attacker.

And he thinks Gmaxwell is a duplicitous idiot and told him that he is a slave.

Y'all will be crying to moma.

It remains to be seen what this will all lead to in the end.

At least we know the scaling debate was never about blocksize, only keeping a competitive advantage for Bitmain.

[iamnotback]

Apparently empty blocks will not be a long-term concern:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/63otrp/gregory_maxwell_major_asic_manufacturer_is/dfvy4wb/

[kiklo]

Apparently, Jihan Wu has been covertly using some patented exploit called asicboost to gain 20%+ efficiency on his hardware that’s incompatible with SegWit. It all makes sense now. Hope he gets his ass sued off.

Shills care to chime in?

https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-April/013996.html

:Start Rant:
1st off, do you guys even bother to read the Lies that G.Maxwell tells.

Instead of the Fairy Tales by the Brothers Grimm , we should call it

The Lying Ass Horror Stories by G.Maxwell for TechnoNerds

In his horror story he claims Energy Efficiently as an Attack Vector , WTF!!!

ASICS miners are driving up Residential Energy Costs , for entire Counties,
Not every one that lives in these areas can afford the increasing electricity costs and it is causing poor people a personal hardship.

And this asshat G.Maxwell wants to hinder energy efficiently and hurt those poor people even more.

If this ASICS Boost works, all of the ASICS Miners should be using it,
hell BTC Core should get off their asses and update the BTC PoW code so it is easier to make it more energy efficient not less.

No wonder , core can't even increase the blocksize or make blockspeed faster to fix a year old transaction capacity problem, they are a bunch of crazed asshats.
:End Rant:

 

[anonymoustroll420]

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.

[jonald_fyookball]

1st off, do you guys even bother to read the Lies that G.Maxwell tells.
 

/start rant:

I really don't understand what kind of upside-down world people are living in.  
Is the propaganda that effective?

Gavin is bad...the miners are bad... Nakamoto consensus is bad... Roger Ver is bad...
...but the core devs working for Bilderburg/AXA funded Blockstream, while
stalling the blocksize for years is acceptable and we should listen to these guys?

Don't get it.

/end of rant.

[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 simply change the logic an ASIC runs, its burnt into the chip

also Gmax said in the email that should anyone start using the obvious way, then they will take steps to stop them too.

[anonymoustroll420]

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.

also Gmax said in the email that should anyone start using the obvious way, then they will take steps to stop them too.

They CAN take steps to stop them, not that they WILL. This has been discussed since 2016 and there is not yet consensus to implement that. But back then nobody knew of the secret way that makes network upgrades really hard, and it seems plausible most people want this part stopped.