Change Bitcoin SHA-256 to SCRYPT

[Jazkal]

What would it take to get the algo changed from SHA-256 to Scrypt?

[Remember remember the 5th of November]

51% of the network in agreement pretty much.

[malevolent]

What would it take to get the algo changed from SHA-256 to Scrypt?

Pretty much impossible in the foreseeable future with all the investments in single-purpose (SHA) ASICs.

[casascius]

What would it take to get the algo changed from SHA-256 to Scrypt?

Pretty much impossible in the foreseeable future with all the investments in single-purpose (SHA) ASICs.

Unless someone wealthy or an organization with a lot of resources manages to do a 51% attack (or simply become the most dominant mining entity) with their own in-house ASIC production, in which case a switch to scrypt could happen overnight.

The reason I say this is I consider it somewhat possible: as budget goes up linearly in an ASIC production enterprise, the output and efficiency goes up something more exponentially.  A big whale could do it, the way I see it.

[TierNolan]

Unless someone wealthy or an organization with a lot of resources manages to do a 51% attack with their own in-house ASIC-based attack project, in which case a switch to scrypt could happen overnight.

Uh no.  A 51% attack cannot trigger a hard fork.

[Jazkal]

I think Let's Talk Bitcoin covered the issue pretty well in Episodes 21 and 22. I've had the same beliefs for some time, and with the way the ASIC world is going, it is playing out. If the community doesn't step up and make the change, or at least have an open discussion on the issue, I see Bitcoin dead in less than a year.

[Peter Todd]

Go buy some Litecoins.

[gmaxwell]

51% of the network in agreement pretty much.

uh. "51%" has nothing to do with anything here.

[Melbustus]

...with the way the ASIC world is going, it is playing out. If the community doesn't step up and make the change, or at least have an open discussion on the issue, I see Bitcoin dead in less than a year.

Why? You think ASICs are centralizing bitcoin too much? Am I missing some other concern?

I have a block-erupter USB running on a Raspberry PI right next to me as I type this. I'm also thinking of ordering some Avalon chips. Various mining hardware suppliers are finally shipping. ASICs are being *widely* distributed, and spiking the total hashrate/security dramatically. Yes, we're absolutely going to see a handful of pools and operators with huge share, but we'll also see a very long-tail of distributed pretty-impressive hashrate.

With GPUs, you'd get that effect less in the long-run because of the reduced efficiency... Fewer people are willing to put a couple expensive graphic cards in their machines and spend the power and space on them versus sticking a tiny efficient USB device in their laptop.

[cypherdoc]

I think Let's Talk Bitcoin covered the issue pretty well in Episodes 21 and 22. I've had the same beliefs for some time, and with the way the ASIC world is going, it is playing out. If the community doesn't step up and make the change, or at least have an open discussion on the issue, I see Bitcoin dead in less than a year.

Andreas is grossly wrong on this one.

[cypherdoc]

What would it take to get the algo changed from SHA-256 to Scrypt?

Pretty much impossible in the foreseeable future with all the investments in single-purpose (SHA) ASICs.

Unless someone wealthy or an organization with a lot of resources manages to do a 51% attack (or simply become the most dominant mining entity) with their own in-house ASIC production, in which case a switch to scrypt could happen overnight.

The reason I say this is I consider it somewhat possible: as budget goes up linearly in an ASIC production enterprise, the output and efficiency goes up something more exponentially.  A big whale could do it, the way I see it.

i seriously doubt it.  they'd have to compete with Avalons chip shipments and they have made a conscious decision to disseminate them widely.  plus, Avalon makes more money doing it this way.

[polarhei]

Big project like this, not possible to modify method at the later stage. Also there is not only one

[skull88]

I think changing the algo would hurt it worser than the ASICs will (which won't hurt it imo).
Like someone mentioned already, if you want scrypt because you think Bitcoin will die due the ASIC's, get Litecoins.

[Jazkal]

I think changing the algo would hurt it worser than the ASICs will (which won't hurt it imo).
Like someone mentioned already, if you want scrypt because you think Bitcoin will die due the ASIC's, get Litecoins.

I have. My GPU farm is pointed at Litecoin. I also have ASICs on order. But Bitcoin is my first love, and I hate to see it slowly commit suicide.

[DeathAndTaxes]

51% of the network in agreement pretty much.

uh. "51%" has nothing to do with anything here.

This I wish this myth would just die.

You can fork Bitcoin easily.  Clone the github, make an incompatible change and publish it.  Assuming you have at least one node mining TADA you have forked Bitcoin.  You can do it with 1% of the hashing power or 99%. In either case two incompatible forks will exist.   Technically there would be two different "Bitcoins".  "Will the real Bitcoin please stand up?"

Now convincing people to use your fork over the original... well that is the tough problem.  It is a societal problem not a technological one. So for the OP example one could make a scrypt fork in probably less than a day.  Now how are you going to convince people to use it?

[DeathAndTaxes]

I think Let's Talk Bitcoin covered the issue pretty well in Episodes 21 and 22. I've had the same beliefs for some time, and with the way the ASIC world is going, it is playing out. If the community doesn't step up and make the change, or at least have an open discussion on the issue, I see Bitcoin dead in less than a year.

Andreas is grossly wrong on this one.

+1 Also didn't like the misquoting of Satoshi (or technically the Bitcoin paper).

Also the whole idea of some miners having "4, 5 magnitudes of efficiency over other miners" is just silly.  It won't happen.  If someone is that inefficient the competitive market means they simply will not mine.  They will use competitive hardware or they won't mine.  Competitive doesn't necessarily mean the absolute best.  If someone releases a 40nm ASIC it doesn't obsolete all other ASICSs.  Sure their resale value goes down, they are less competitive, they spend more per BTC on energy but they can still compete.  A 1 or 2 level process improvement (i.e. 110nm vs 85 vs 60 nm) doesn't produce a magnitude improvement.  In theory a 2x improvement in electrical efficiency and maybe a 1.5x improvement in capital efficiency however real world often falls short (even by major players like Intel and AMD).

So the question comes looking forward 18-24 months will ASICs be widely available from multiple sources competing in an open free market?  Nothing I have seen indicates it won't.  So instead of debating buying used AMD 5000 series cards vs the new HD 7970 it will be "should I buy this used BFL SC Single" or spend more on this next gen ASIC Miner board.

Can someone please articulate an argument that in 18-24 months there won't be multiple ASICs, reasonably available from multiple vendors.

[jimbobway]

A security researcher has predicted SHA 256 will be cracked this year.  When that happens the algorithm may change.

[DeathAndTaxes]

A security researcher has predicted SHA 256 will be cracked this year.  When that happens the algorithm may change.

Cite?  There are not even any "academic attacks" against SHA-2 at this time.  An academic attacking being a method which is faster than brute force but still computationally infeasible to exploit in the real world.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

A security researcher has predicted SHA 256 will be cracked this year.  When that happens the algorithm may change.

Can I bet on that?

[Jazkal]

A security researcher has predicted SHA 256 will be cracked this year.  When that happens the algorithm may change.

So, If that should happen, someone could attack the block chain, and possibly mine the entire rest of the chain in a matter of days\weeks? Yeah, if that is the case, that would force a hard fork.