(Unofficial) [ANN] Litecoin [LTC] to X11 algorithm hardfork

[quovadiz]

Why would I build another GPU rig for $2200 when i can get a Script Asic miner that hashes 3 times as much with less power and costs me less than $400?

The low cost high efficiency Asic machines make it even easier for everyone to mine litecoin for much less than using GPUs. So they should help to maintain decentralization. Basically anyone get > 8 MHS for $0.04 per kHs and use a ton less electricity than GPUs.

I might even give away my GPUs just to replace them with 30 Fibonacci recursions per GPU on my mining rig. Way cheaper way to get great hashing power on one rig and at a much lower price per kHs. I just can't see how that will decrease decentralization. Everyone can do the same without buying a KNC Titan.

Just because it's not a fair market... Somebody, maybe who developed these Asic, is already using them... with such huge scrypt firepower they are collecting scrypt coins like nuts!.. Just some months for them to collect lot of coins witn a not fair hardware equipment... Who bought them in preorder gave the money long time ago... and they will receive asic when it will be late and the producers already squeezed out the most precious juice from scrypt coins... Good business is to have money in advance, to use now these asic and to dispatch them out with a high delay! Too easy and too unfair for me! and again... once these asic will finally be in stock they will already have a 2nd generation ready to mine for them w your money again at a higher and higher hashrate...
If the team will think it's better to change the algo then i'm for it!
Long life to the GPUs mining rigs!

[1715351543]

1715351543

[1715351543]

1715351543

[1715351543]

1715351543

[1715351543]

1715351543

[1715351543]

1715351543

[1715351543]

1715351543

[ivanlabrie]

X11 is stupid, only algo that is asic proof is scrypt chacha with scheduled N factor changes on a rather frequent schedule. Frequent enough to put down asic development.

No such thing as asic-proof with most common algorithms. If the schedule is known in advance, an ASIC designer can make the necessary accommodations.

If on the other hand the coin is protected by the will of the devs to hardfork to something slightly different, then any algorithm is ok. For example just as scrypt-n could change the n factor, X11 could hardfork to reverse the flow of hashing between some hash types, thus braking ASIC functionality that expects the flow to go a certain way. Or even adding another two three hashes and making it X12/X13/X14/X15 etc.

You're not getting it...hard forking the coin every time is too complicated and not a good idea, imho.

Scheduled n factor changes make it pretty hard for asic developments to surface, since you'd need more and more ram each time to maintain the shaders saturated. Gpus will win each time, since you can adjust settings or get gpus with more vram and play with raw intensity and lookup gap.

Making asics and having to modify the software or making a new batch for each N factor is not economically feasible at all.

[victormx]

IMHO Better create your coin if you want your own algo. At the time of this means you do not have the ability to handle a coin and prefer to take the hard job of others(devs, community, minners, investors) and a stable user base, just my opinion don't hate me

[litecoin_messiah]

IMHO Better create your coin if you want your own algo. At the time of this means you do not have the ability to handle a coin and prefer to take the hard job of others(devs, community, minners, investors) and a stable user base, just my opinion don't hate me

These idiots think they can fork the litecoin change, fuck it rare possibility they will they choose x11, something that isn't even tested properly yet.

No point making Litecoin ASIC proof, the real aim is having the ASIC's diversified. I do whatever in my power i can to discourage the promotion of PRE-Orders happening, once we keep it this way it's unlikely we will have another BFLabs fiasco happening.

[Hueristic]

X11 is stupid, only algo that is asic proof is scrypt chacha with scheduled N factor changes on a rather frequent schedule. Frequent enough to put down asic development.

No such thing as asic-proof with most common algorithms. If the schedule is known in advance, an ASIC designer can make the necessary accommodations.

If on the other hand the coin is protected by the will of the devs to hardfork to something slightly different, then any algorithm is ok. For example just as scrypt-n could change the n factor, X11 could hardfork to reverse the flow of hashing between some hash types, thus braking ASIC functionality that expects the flow to go a certain way. Or even adding another two three hashes and making it X12/X13/X14/X15 etc.

QFT


EDIT:
I would also like to add that if and when the Devs do this they will have PROVEN that they are willing and able to hard fork when needed and then those that would profit on creating the ASIC for the next fork will realize it is doomed to failure before release and therefor will naturally not attempt it again.

[hardcoreprime]

Lets just make everyone happy...What about litecoin-asic and litecoin-Scrypt 

[jayson3]

If you want to experiment, make your own coin.  There is $350 million in market value in Litecoin, and a rogue hard fork puts that value at risk.  A big part of that value is due to the stability, longevity, and widespread adoption of litecoin.  The technology is proven.  Your proposal will destroy the very factors that make Litecoin valuable as it is today.

[Hueristic]

If you want to experiment, make your own coin.  There is $350 million in market value in Litecoin, and a rogue hard fork puts that value at risk.  A big part of that value is due to the stability, longevity, and widespread adoption of litecoin.  The technology is proven.  Your proposal will destroy the very factors that make Litecoin valuable as it is today.

Ok Nostradamus. I think you missed the point of this discussion.

BTW before anyone thinks otherwise, I am not part of this group and stumbled on this thread as I have been thinking ASIC is a centralization factor for some time and only one coin can afford it and that coin is already "Coined" so to speak.

[Beeker]

wtf? lol.. thats actually possible?? hard fork it when youre not the dev?

Yes it is.

Hi, is there any Litecoin offical statement from litecoin develop group?

We don't need the Litecoin developers.
We need the majority to support this to make this hardfork work.

The developer group doesn't have any power when the majority supports a hardfork.

So because you want to change the creation of the devs or because the peoples want, you will? it's not your creation man...

You're a fcking nazi.

Just for money.... you are ready to make anything.

I assume you voted against?

[Hueristic]

wtf? lol.. thats actually possible?? hard fork it when youre not the dev?

Yes it is.

Hi, is there any Litecoin offical statement from litecoin develop group?

We don't need the Litecoin developers.
We need the majority to support this to make this hardfork work.

The developer group doesn't have any power when the majority supports a hardfork.

So because you want to change the creation of the devs or because the peoples want, you will? it's not your creation man...

You're a fcking nazi.

Just for money.... you are ready to make anything.

LOL, you lose. That didn't take long.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

[gerdab]

so, there'll be 2 LTC or the older must die?

[Beeker]

so, there'll be 2 LTC or the older must die?

If a majority agrees on mining and trading with the updated client (with the hardfork set at block 5xx,xxx) the old chain can still be mined but will not be accepted by pools, exchanges, etc.

Hardforking is the easy part, the developers told me.
The difficult part is to get everyone behind us, on the new fork.

That's where our challenge lies ahead.

Litecoin is not owned by the current developers or anyone, it's a decentralized P2P currency and if enough people support a change, that's the change.
That's why, for example, Ghostlander was able to takeover PXC when the developers went awol; the community, pools and exchanges accepted his hardfork for the parameters he changed.

We like to call coins "decentralized" but when a group offers to bring changes to the coin, people start pointing at the LTC developers. They are not needed, just like Satoshi Nakamoto wasn't needed for the success of Bitcoin.

Some people are screaming and shouting at us for the fact that we want to bring progress to LTC. I guess they don't understand how P2P cryptocurrencies work.

[Hueristic]

so, there'll be 2 LTC or the older must die?

If a majority agrees on mining and trading with the updated client (with the hardfork set at block 5xx,xxx) the old chain can still be mined but will not be accepted by pools, exchanges, etc.

Hardforking is the easy part, the developers told me.
The difficult part is to get everyone behind us, on the new fork.

That's where our challenge lies ahead.

Litecoin is not owned by the current developers or anyone, it's a decentralized P2P currency and if enough people support a change, that's the change.
That's why, for example, Ghostlander was able to takeover PXC when the developers went awol; the community, pools and exchanges accepted his hardfork for the parameters he changed.

We like to call coins "decentralized" but when a group offers to bring changes to the coin, people start pointing at the LTC developers. They are not needed, just like Satoshi Nakamoto wasn't needed for the success of Bitcoin.

Some people are screaming and shouting at me, I guess they don't understand how P2P cryptocurrencies work.

The first step to getting everyone onboard is to get the Dev's to come in a thread and SAY they are onboard. Since you have spoken to them this should not be a problem rite?

I would just like to see them start a thread to discuss the matter. The community should decide on what algo to change if any not some guy that says We are gonna add x11. I'm not arguing it's not the best algo to goto as I freely admit I have not researched it and don't intend to spend my time do just that. But it does need to be vetted by those that are capable as well as vested.

[jddebug]

I vote NO.

If you want a new algorithm then make a new coin or mine one that has what you like. Litecoin is fine as it is.

ASIC is the natural progression from GPU's just as GPU's were from CPU's.

Also, if there's a split it 'could' make both chains more vulnerable to attack.

It will likely bring into question the coins value/security.

Again, if you want something different, why mess with litecoin?

Not everyone can deal with GPU's and the problems that come with them. ASIC's (although pre orders suck) allow even more people to get involved as they are usually self contained professionally designed devices.

My 2 cents.

[Magic8Ball]

Good luck on this. You will hardly get any support though, and it will remain as just another fork.

[Magic8Ball]

so, there'll be 2 LTC or the older must die?

2 LTC can exist, of course.

In practice this new one will not gain any traction and will probably die off soon enough.

[elgreco]

OP, I understand what you are trying to do, but you are fighting a losing battle.

A hard fork is simply the creation of a new coin. Sure you can say, "This new coin will honor the balances of the old coin prior to block X", but its still a new coin.

There is no point in fighting technological progress, you will ultimately fail. You cannot protect anything from the future.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite

[ivanlabrie]

OP, I understand what you are trying to do, but you are fighting a losing battle.

A hard fork is simply the creation of a new coin. Sure you can say, "This new coin will honor the balances of the old coin prior to block X", but its still a new coin.

There is no point in fighting technological progress, you will ultimately fail. You cannot protect anything from the future.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite

"Technological" progress as in "pre-order funded R&D" devices that you get way after the manufacturer's done playing with them is not my idea of progress nor descentralization.
I think greed will make it hard to fight these asic beeyetches but the pre-order scam must die, people should vote with their wallets...just my opinion naturally.

You won't make any money buying asics from the greedy as fug manufacturers who only deal with pre-orders. Go gpu, AMD or Nvidia don't care as much as to not sell you gpus and mine themselves, they got better things to do.

[btcxyzzz]

This is not ethical, if you have a problem with Litecoin - then make another coin, don't try to steal Litecoin's userbase. Anyways, chances this project will succeed are ridiculous, you're wasting your time.

[orcephrye]

Doing this wouldn't secure LiteCoin's future. It would doom it.

ASIC doesn't mean you loose decentralization. I mine both with GPUs and with ASICs. ASICs are cheaper, faster, energy efficient. The energy efficiency means someone like myself who doesn’t own a datacenter with 1000s of AMPs of power can mine 100s of MegaHashs. If you stay with GPUs then in the future only people with lots of time, money, large scale cooling, and power can mine the coin for profit.

Again ASICs means you can mine coin for *cheaper* up front costs.
Again ASICs means you can mine coin for *less* power.
Again ASICs means you can *scale* your mining operation to larger heights without having data-center like resources.
Again ASICs means more coin, for less energy, to *more people*, faster.

ASICs should not be feared.

People do not like that they will have to spend more money after buying a lot of GPUs that may have not yet gotten a ROI. That is understandable. And there are other Coins out there that are still GPU only. So there is no need to throw in the towel. Why not look into up-in-coming coin ideas. Like SecureCoin, or FairQuark. Or some of the N-Scrypt coins.

If you make a coin that tries to replace LiteCoin but is more ASIC resistant you will just... lower.. the difficulty of ... litecoin... hrmm... GO GO GO dam those dirty ASICs for taking over LiteCoin... ALL GPU miners should just leave now! Power to the ... rrr... X11 Coin!? woot!

p.s:
Also... X11!? De-frack? You REALLY wanna name your coin after a monolithic horrible bundle of miss match code that is X11. Not to borrow from the Emacs haters but... X11 is a good OS, its just lacking a Window System. Actually that isn't even true... its horrible. All hail WayLand!