miningmeter
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 15
Merit: 0
|
 |
January 21, 2016, 07:14:47 AM |
|
Can it be Core and Classic instead of Core vs Classic ? My discussion with Jonathan Toomim in "Miner In World" WeChat group. http://pastebin.com/B8YQr5TQI'm working on a proposal for a rotating PoW changes to allow Core to survive Classic activation and bring an era of endless GPU mining to Core. Please take the time to read it and comment. Guy I think the problem you are trying to solve isn't real. I think Core and Classic will converge to friendly competition, and be on the same blockchain. There will not be an actual work between these two groups. My 2 cents. So, My estimation is that Core team will split. Some will continue to work on Core but on Classic chain, buy some will prefer to do PoW (and Transaction ID) change rather to submit to the new governance. Guy And you will be there to give new governance to it? He wants to start a central committee of hash and for him to be part of it. He does this out of his company falling apart. They went from giving huge bonus to all top level employees to being beat by Bitfury where no one with big orders will want a SP50. He is trying to find way to stay relevant. This is one attempt at it. He will not be able to do it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No Gods or Kings. Only Bitcoin
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
smooth
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
|
|
January 21, 2016, 07:21:54 AM |
|
Can it be Core and Classic instead of Core vs Classic ? My discussion with Jonathan Toomim in "Miner In World" WeChat group. http://pastebin.com/B8YQr5TQI'm working on a proposal for a rotating PoW changes to allow Core to survive Classic activation and bring an era of endless GPU mining to Core. Please take the time to read it and comment. Guy I think the problem you are trying to solve isn't real. I think Core and Classic will converge to friendly competition, and be on the same blockchain. There will not be an actual work between these two groups. My 2 cents. So, My estimation is that Core team will split. Some will continue to work on Core but on Classic chain, buy some will prefer to do PoW (and Transaction ID) change rather to submit to the new governance. Guy And you will be there to give new governance to it? He wants to start a central committee of hash and for him to be part of it. He does this out of his company falling apart. They went from giving huge bonus to all top level employees to being beat by Bitfury where no one with big orders will want a SP50. He is trying to find way to stay relevant. This is one attempt at it. He will not be able to do it. Seems like a pointless personal attack by you (even as I agree the committee is a dumb idea). The proposal from him I saw was for the term on the committee to be limited so even if he were on it, he wouldn't be on it for long. So what? |
|
|
|
|
miningmeter
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 15
Merit: 0
|
|
January 21, 2016, 07:27:17 AM |
|
Can it be Core and Classic instead of Core vs Classic ? My discussion with Jonathan Toomim in "Miner In World" WeChat group. http://pastebin.com/B8YQr5TQI'm working on a proposal for a rotating PoW changes to allow Core to survive Classic activation and bring an era of endless GPU mining to Core. Please take the time to read it and comment. Guy I think the problem you are trying to solve isn't real. I think Core and Classic will converge to friendly competition, and be on the same blockchain. There will not be an actual work between these two groups. My 2 cents. So, My estimation is that Core team will split. Some will continue to work on Core but on Classic chain, buy some will prefer to do PoW (and Transaction ID) change rather to submit to the new governance. Guy And you will be there to give new governance to it? He wants to start a central committee of hash and for him to be part of it. He does this out of his company falling apart. They went from giving huge bonus to all top level employees to being beat by Bitfury where no one with big orders will want a SP50. He is trying to find way to stay relevant. This is one attempt at it. He will not be able to do it. Seems like a pointless personal attack by you (even as I agree the committee is a dumb idea). The proposal from him I saw was for the term on the committee to be limited so even if he were on it, he wouldn't be on it for long. So what? So a company that lost in the asic race wants to start a new way of profit via committee. Spondoolies is growing unprofitable look at the data, they have to release after being public. If they won the asic race they would not be pushing for this. The SP50 sealed the deal on them going away, unless they can pull something like this. Have you read their company stats? |
|
|
|
|
smooth
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
|
|
January 21, 2016, 07:28:32 AM |
|
Can it be Core and Classic instead of Core vs Classic ? My discussion with Jonathan Toomim in "Miner In World" WeChat group. http://pastebin.com/B8YQr5TQI'm working on a proposal for a rotating PoW changes to allow Core to survive Classic activation and bring an era of endless GPU mining to Core. Please take the time to read it and comment. Guy I think the problem you are trying to solve isn't real. I think Core and Classic will converge to friendly competition, and be on the same blockchain. There will not be an actual work between these two groups. My 2 cents. So, My estimation is that Core team will split. Some will continue to work on Core but on Classic chain, buy some will prefer to do PoW (and Transaction ID) change rather to submit to the new governance. Guy And you will be there to give new governance to it? He wants to start a central committee of hash and for him to be part of it. He does this out of his company falling apart. They went from giving huge bonus to all top level employees to being beat by Bitfury where no one with big orders will want a SP50. He is trying to find way to stay relevant. This is one attempt at it. He will not be able to do it. Seems like a pointless personal attack by you (even as I agree the committee is a dumb idea). The proposal from him I saw was for the term on the committee to be limited so even if he were on it, he wouldn't be on it for long. So what? So a company that lost in the asic race wants to start a new way of profit via committee. Spondoolies is growing unprofitable look at the data, they have to release after being public. If they won the asic race they would not be pushing for this. The SP50 sealed the deal on them going away, unless they can pull something like this. Have you read their company stats? How are they going to profit from this? Competing with AMD or NVIDIA on GPUs? |
|
|
|
|
miningmeter
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 15
Merit: 0
|
|
January 21, 2016, 07:40:38 AM |
|
Can it be Core and Classic instead of Core vs Classic ? My discussion with Jonathan Toomim in "Miner In World" WeChat group. http://pastebin.com/B8YQr5TQI'm working on a proposal for a rotating PoW changes to allow Core to survive Classic activation and bring an era of endless GPU mining to Core. Please take the time to read it and comment. Guy I think the problem you are trying to solve isn't real. I think Core and Classic will converge to friendly competition, and be on the same blockchain. There will not be an actual work between these two groups. My 2 cents. So, My estimation is that Core team will split. Some will continue to work on Core but on Classic chain, buy some will prefer to do PoW (and Transaction ID) change rather to submit to the new governance. Guy And you will be there to give new governance to it? He wants to start a central committee of hash and for him to be part of it. He does this out of his company falling apart. They went from giving huge bonus to all top level employees to being beat by Bitfury where no one with big orders will want a SP50. He is trying to find way to stay relevant. This is one attempt at it. He will not be able to do it. Seems like a pointless personal attack by you (even as I agree the committee is a dumb idea). The proposal from him I saw was for the term on the committee to be limited so even if he were on it, he wouldn't be on it for long. So what? So a company that lost in the asic race wants to start a new way of profit via committee. Spondoolies is growing unprofitable look at the data, they have to release after being public. If they won the asic race they would not be pushing for this. The SP50 sealed the deal on them going away, unless they can pull something like this. Have you read their company stats? How they going to profit from this? Competing with AMD or NVIDIA on GPUs? It's about trying to get all companies on same level. Do you not see he pushes from asics after losing on development? Mining on Bitcoin will not go back to GPU's its a attempt to go to something other then asic which they are losing at. They want to be on same level as bitfury, so change the protocol since cant match chips. They never had a problem when they were ontop and making tons. Only after they were beat in the asic development do they want to change protocol. I will not waste more time on Guy. Time to get back to work. |
|
|
|
|
smooth
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
|
|
January 21, 2016, 07:47:50 AM |
|
Can it be Core and Classic instead of Core vs Classic ? My discussion with Jonathan Toomim in "Miner In World" WeChat group. http://pastebin.com/B8YQr5TQI'm working on a proposal for a rotating PoW changes to allow Core to survive Classic activation and bring an era of endless GPU mining to Core. Please take the time to read it and comment. Guy I think the problem you are trying to solve isn't real. I think Core and Classic will converge to friendly competition, and be on the same blockchain. There will not be an actual work between these two groups. My 2 cents. So, My estimation is that Core team will split. Some will continue to work on Core but on Classic chain, buy some will prefer to do PoW (and Transaction ID) change rather to submit to the new governance. Guy And you will be there to give new governance to it? He wants to start a central committee of hash and for him to be part of it. He does this out of his company falling apart. They went from giving huge bonus to all top level employees to being beat by Bitfury where no one with big orders will want a SP50. He is trying to find way to stay relevant. This is one attempt at it. He will not be able to do it. Seems like a pointless personal attack by you (even as I agree the committee is a dumb idea). The proposal from him I saw was for the term on the committee to be limited so even if he were on it, he wouldn't be on it for long. So what? So a company that lost in the asic race wants to start a new way of profit via committee. Spondoolies is growing unprofitable look at the data, they have to release after being public. If they won the asic race they would not be pushing for this. The SP50 sealed the deal on them going away, unless they can pull something like this. Have you read their company stats? How they going to profit from this? Competing with AMD or NVIDIA on GPUs? It's about trying to get all companies on same level. Do you not see he pushes from asics after losing on development? Mining on Bitcoin will not go back to GPU's its a attempt to go to something other then asic which they are losing at. They want to be on same level as bitfury, so change the protocol since cant match chips. They never had a problem when they were ontop and making tons. Only after they were beat in the asic development do they want to change protocol. I will not waste more time on Guy. Time to get back to work. How is Guy going to make money from this? Be specific. |
|
|
|
|
Guy Corem (OP)
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1414
Merit: 1051
Spondoolies, Beam & DAGlabs
|
|
January 21, 2016, 08:38:43 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
Guy Corem (OP)
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1414
Merit: 1051
Spondoolies, Beam & DAGlabs
|
|
January 21, 2016, 09:09:35 AM |
|
Another interesting proposal is Cuckoo hash by John Tromp: https://github.com/tromp/cuckoo |
|
|
|
|
jtoomim
|
|
January 21, 2016, 10:07:03 AM |
|
Changing the PoW function is pretty crazy. I was disappointed that Guy was taking these threats seriously. https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/41vqbo/bitcoindev_pieter_wuillle_its_ridiculous_to/><sipa> Luke-Jr: they may, but it's ridiculous to propose that at this point, sorry >... >so do not worry, i have no intention of merging such a thing Matt Corallo and I touched on the topic later: http://imgur.com/4i61zYI>thebluematt: He is... The threat mostly isn't serious Luke may create his Keccak hash function fork; he already has the code. But it's not going to be called Core. |
Hosting bitcoin miners for $65 to $80/kW/month on clean, cheap hydro power. http://Toom.im |
|
|
Guy Corem (OP)
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1414
Merit: 1051
Spondoolies, Beam & DAGlabs
|
|
January 21, 2016, 10:38:06 AM |
|
You keep referring to it as a threat. I believe that the remaining devs in Core will do it. We went through it in our chat yesterday. You agreed on 75% chance that it will happen. So if they will do it, I think that they should do it in a way which will prevent ASIC-ization. Memory bound hashing is very good suggestion: https://github.com/tromp/cuckooGuy |
|
|
|
|
mavericklm
|
|
January 21, 2016, 11:16:44 AM |
|
Who the fuck is this classic?
I thought this was the thread of a asic manufacturer....
Where is my last generation SP-tech asic?! i want it in my watercooled miner...
|
|
|
|
|
smooth
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
|
|
January 21, 2016, 12:13:48 PM |
|
Changing the PoW function is pretty crazy. It may be. The state of Bitcoin mining is also pretty crazy. |
|
|
|
|
Guy Corem (OP)
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1414
Merit: 1051
Spondoolies, Beam & DAGlabs
|
|
January 21, 2016, 01:14:32 PM |
|
Changing the PoW function is pretty crazy. It may be. The state of Bitcoin mining is also pretty crazy. The state of Bitcoin mining is also pretty crazy. |
|
|
|
Unacceptable
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2212
Merit: 1001
|
|
January 21, 2016, 01:48:20 PM |
|
Can it be Core and Classic instead of Core vs Classic ? My discussion with Jonathan Toomim in "Miner In World" WeChat group. http://pastebin.com/B8YQr5TQI'm working on a proposal for a rotating PoW changes to allow Core to survive Classic activation and bring an era of endless GPU mining to Core. Please take the time to read it and comment. Guy I think the problem you are trying to solve isn't real. I think Core and Classic will converge to friendly competition, and be on the same blockchain. There will not be an actual work between these two groups. My 2 cents. So, My estimation is that Core team will split. Some will continue to work on Core but on Classic chain, buy some will prefer to do PoW (and Transaction ID) change rather to submit to the new governance. Guy Edit: Interesting times. I think that two competing Chains is the favorable outcome. Each will be entitled to the name "Bitcoin" since both came into existence after hard-fork. Someone from Avalon tried that a few years ago....didn't work out too well for him  |
"If you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. If you run into assholes all day long, you are the asshole." -Raylan Givens Got GOXXED ?? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KiqRpPiJAU&feature=youtu.be"An ASIC being late is perfectly normal, predictable, and legal..."Hashfast & BFL slogan  |
|
|
Biodom
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3738
Merit: 3836
|
|
January 21, 2016, 05:21:21 PM |
|
So,
My estimation is that Core team will split. Some will continue to work on Core but on Classic chain, buy some will prefer to do PoW (and Transaction ID) change rather to submit to the new governance.
Guy
Edit: Interesting times. I think that two competing Chains is the favorable outcome. Each will be entitled to the name "Bitcoin" since both came into existence after hard-fork.
are you kidding? favorable to what? maybe to development in some sense, but not bitcoin's value. Imagine the nightmare of having an "old" bitcoin in a wallet and then deciding on what chain to spend it and have change deposited to. 90% of people will simply sell or do NO transactions altogether and wait until one chain would be dominant. In addition, say, i decided to sell carbonated sugar syrup and call it "Coca Cola next generation". Do you think that I would be able to do it? |
|
|
|
|
Guy Corem (OP)
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1414
Merit: 1051
Spondoolies, Beam & DAGlabs
|
|
January 21, 2016, 06:12:17 PM |
|
So,
My estimation is that Core team will split. Some will continue to work on Core but on Classic chain, buy some will prefer to do PoW (and Transaction ID) change rather to submit to the new governance.
Guy
Edit: Interesting times. I think that two competing Chains is the favorable outcome. Each will be entitled to the name "Bitcoin" since both came into existence after hard-fork.
are you kidding? favorable to what? maybe to development in some sense, but not bitcoin's value. Imagine the nightmare of having an "old" bitcoin in a wallet and then deciding on what chain to spend it and have change deposited to. 90% of people will simply sell or do NO transactions altogether and wait until one chain would be dominant. In addition, say, i decided to sell carbonated sugar syrup and call it "Coca Cola next generation". Do you think that I would be able to do it? You might want to read Meni Rosenfeld: http://fieryspinningsword.com/2015/08/25/how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-the-fork/https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3i9eiv/how_i_learned_to_stop_worrying_and_love_the_fork/ |
|
|
|
Guy Corem (OP)
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1414
Merit: 1051
Spondoolies, Beam & DAGlabs
|
|
January 21, 2016, 06:22:37 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
dogie
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1666
Merit: 1183
dogiecoin.com
|
|
January 21, 2016, 06:42:14 PM |
|
Is that really any better? High end GPUs (still costing the same as a CPU) run it 5x quicker and that amount is forever going to diverge. So again its not 1 CPU 1 vote, its 1 CPU and back to the 6 GPUs on ribbon risers and 31 votes. Then you have the problems that RAM isn't an infallible resource - PCI-E based SSDs are getting closer and closer to RAM but with 100x the capacity. I am aware even commercial 4x PCI-E SSDs have 250-500x higher latency than core RAM but what could we do if that was the actual objective? It won't take long for a Spondoolies-Tech V2 to work out a Cuckoo42 ASIC. Edit: Seems like you're more concerned with getting the previous pages of discussion buried, I don't think you believe what you're posting. Are the investors calling? |
|
|
|
tromp
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 976
Merit: 1076
|
|
January 21, 2016, 07:00:16 PM |
|
Is that really any better? Quoting a recent Hacker News comment of mine ( https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=tromp) Bitcoin mining could be more decentralized if it better resembled a lottery, where huge numbers of people play for an expected loss.
In other words, the lack of people mining at a loss makes mining profitable and hence subject to forces of centralization.
There are several reasons why mining as a lottery substitute is rare, a major one being that commodity hardware is inefficient by many orders of magnitude, making even a botnet next to useless.
Perhaps, if a proof of work, whose efficiency gap (with custom hardware) is at most an order of magnitude, were adopted (or slowly phased in), enough lottery players would arise to make mining unprofitable at scale.
Botnets should then just be welcomed as a modest increase in decentralization.
However I don't expect Spondoolies-Tech to support this vision of unprofitable mining... Disclaimer: I designed Cuckoo Cycle |
|
|
|
|
Guy Corem (OP)
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1414
Merit: 1051
Spondoolies, Beam & DAGlabs
|
|
January 21, 2016, 07:10:40 PM |
|
Is that really any better? Quoting a recent Hacker News comment of mine ( https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=tromp) Bitcoin mining could be more decentralized if it better resembled a lottery, where huge numbers of people play for an expected loss.
In other words, the lack of people mining at a loss makes mining profitable and hence subject to forces of centralization.
There are several reasons why mining as a lottery substitute is rare, a major one being that commodity hardware is inefficient by many orders of magnitude, making even a botnet next to useless.
Perhaps, if a proof of work, whose efficiency gap (with custom hardware) is at most an order of magnitude, were adopted (or slowly phased in), enough lottery players would arise to make mining unprofitable at scale.
Botnets should then just be welcomed as a modest increase in decentralization.
However I don't expect Spondoolies-Tech to support this vision of unprofitable mining... Disclaimer: I designed Cuckoo Cycle Hello John, nice to meet you in our little thread. Mind the dog. |
|
|
|
|
