|
bbc.reporter
|
 |
December 10, 2018, 12:28:38 AM |
|
Why and what would be the advantages in upgrading the proof of work algorithm again? Will it reduce hashrate or increase it?
The goal was to brick existing ASIC miners. The advantage of this is that it keeps mining decentralised. There was a comment on github that said that our hashrate doubled and so there will be more investors. If that was true then why did we change the proof of work algorithm to stop Asics?
Why do you care about "investors"? Surely people that use the coin are far more important than "investors". Finally, the hashrate itself isn't too important. The Monero network at 500 MH/s would be much more secure than the Bitcoin network at 500 MH/s. One has millions of computer securing it, and the other one has a single 5 year old GPU. Why do I care about investors? Investors are holders. If Aeon has more holders, it will have a bigger community, if it has a bigger community, it will have a bigger chance of success. Also, a higher hashrate secures Aeon and that is very important. Maybe you did not hear the news about the Asic resistant coin, Vertcoin? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
|
|
|
mattcode
Copper Member
Member
 Offline
Activity: 277
Merit: 21
|
|
December 10, 2018, 05:51:04 PM |
|
Why do you care about "investors"? Surely people that use the coin are far more important than "investors".
Why do I care about investors? Investors are holders. If Aeon has more holders, it will have a bigger community, if it has a bigger community, it will have a bigger chance of success. I feel like a lot of "investors" don't take part in the community. They just hold on to their coins expecting to make a profit, they don't purchase things with the coins, don't accept the coins as payment, don't participate in the community etc. Finally, the hashrate itself isn't too important. The Monero network at 500 MH/s would be much more secure than the Bitcoin network at 500 MH/s. One has millions of computer securing it, and the other one has a single 5 year old GPU.
Also, a higher hashrate secures Aeon and that is very important. Maybe you did not hear the news about the Asic resistant coin, Vertcoin? Sorry, I think you misunderstood what I said (or more likely, I just explained it poorly). The hashrate itself doesn't matter, what matters is how difficult it is for some hostile entity to get a significant percentage of the network hashrate. |
|
|
|
|
|
bigslimvdub
|
|
December 10, 2018, 07:32:50 PM |
|
Aeon has had 4+ years for someone to attack it. When there were ASICS, they were centralized (or actually unknown origin since they were not mining in public pools for the most part) so it could be considered hostile. If asic owners would have spread their hash rates evenly on public pools like the botnets do, we may be having a different conversation.
Also, average Aeon user mining does not have $4000 for asic to mine with. Most have cpu, server cpu, or possibly one rig or just one gpu. How do you fairly distribute advanced mining equipment that only select individuals can afford?
Yes having 300Mh would help secure the network, but wouldn’t having 300mh of cpu/gpu mining be a more community friendly approach? That is the discussion aeon needs, especially since it would only take 100-150mh of XMR hash rate to achieve this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
bbc.reporter
|
|
December 11, 2018, 01:09:30 AM |
|
Why do you care about "investors"? Surely people that use the coin are far more important than "investors".
Why do I care about investors? Investors are holders. If Aeon has more holders, it will have a bigger community, if it has a bigger community, it will have a bigger chance of success. I feel like a lot of "investors" don't take part in the community. They just hold on to their coins expecting to make a profit, they don't purchase things with the coins, don't accept the coins as payment, don't participate in the community etc. Finally, the hashrate itself isn't too important. The Monero network at 500 MH/s would be much more secure than the Bitcoin network at 500 MH/s. One has millions of computer securing it, and the other one has a single 5 year old GPU.
Also, a higher hashrate secures Aeon and that is very important. Maybe you did not hear the news about the Asic resistant coin, Vertcoin? Sorry, I think you misunderstood what I said (or more likely, I just explained it poorly). The hashrate itself doesn't matter, what matters is how difficult it is for some hostile entity to get a significant percentage of the network hashrate. There is still more chance of having a bigger community if there are more holders or trapped bagholders hehehe. Is it really more difficult for GPU farms that can transfer mining from coin to coin to attack Aeon? How does that argument justify what occured with Vertcoin? |
|
|
|
|
estenity
|
|
December 11, 2018, 01:59:31 AM |
|
Why do you care about "investors"? Surely people that use the coin are far more important than "investors".
Why do I care about investors? Investors are holders. If Aeon has more holders, it will have a bigger community, if it has a bigger community, it will have a bigger chance of success. I feel like a lot of "investors" don't take part in the community. They just hold on to their coins expecting to make a profit, they don't purchase things with the coins, don't accept the coins as payment, don't participate in the community etc. Finally, the hashrate itself isn't too important. The Monero network at 500 MH/s would be much more secure than the Bitcoin network at 500 MH/s. One has millions of computer securing it, and the other one has a single 5 year old GPU.
Also, a higher hashrate secures Aeon and that is very important. Maybe you did not hear the news about the Asic resistant coin, Vertcoin? Sorry, I think you misunderstood what I said (or more likely, I just explained it poorly). The hashrate itself doesn't matter, what matters is how difficult it is for some hostile entity to get a significant percentage of the network hashrate. There is still more chance of having a bigger community if there are more holders or trapped bagholders hehehe. Is it really more difficult for GPU farms that can transfer mining from coin to coin to attack Aeon? How does that argument justify what occured with Vertcoin? citation begins: In a textbook 51 percent attack documented in a blog post by Coinbase security engineer Mark Nesbitt, someone seized majority control of the Vertcoin network’s hashing power to conduct multiple “reorgs” of the blockchain. The attacker essentially rewrote part of the ledger’s history and then, using their dominant hashing power to produce the longest chain, convinced the rest of the miners to validate this new version of the blockchain. With that, he or she could commit the ultimate crypto crime: a double-spend of prior transactions, leaving earlier payees holding invalidated coins. https://www.coindesk.com/vertcoins-struggle-is-everyones-struggle |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
bbc.reporter
|
|
December 12, 2018, 01:22:32 AM |
|
@estenity. What would give the Aeon community some assurance that the attacker is not looking at our project as another one of their targets?
I reckon the reorgs done last year which caused Cryptopia to delist us was an effort to double spend, however much harder to verify in cryptonote coins.
|
|
|
|
smooth
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2506
Merit: 1160
|
|
December 12, 2018, 03:13:14 AM |
|
I reckon the reorgs done last year which caused Cryptopia to delist us was an effort to double spend, however much harder to verify in cryptonote coins.
It wasn't, it was a bug. Once the bug was fixed and the nodes that got confused were unconfused, there was only one valid chain, no real reorg. Forking bugs this this can happen in any literally any blockchain regardless of hash rate unless the code is bug free. In fact it did happen in Bitcoin, though it was caught relatively quickly. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
cryptouser
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 249
Merit: 100
O__o
|
|
December 14, 2018, 10:37:11 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
bbc.reporter
|
|
December 15, 2018, 12:23:14 AM |
|
Does anyone know a good website that ranks all cryptonote coins by hashrate? Chainradar does not have Aeon and some of the other cryptonote coins anymore.
@smooth. Thank you for the clarification.
|
|
|
|
camthegeek
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 31
Merit: 1
|
|
December 15, 2018, 01:26:59 AM |
|
Does anyone know a good website that ranks all cryptonote coins by hashrate? Chainradar does not have Aeon and some of the other cryptonote coins anymore.
@smooth. Thank you for the clarification.
Check https://miningpoolstats.stream/It feels slow sometimes but it has all the stats you may be looking for. |
|
|
|
|
|
bbc.reporter
|
|
December 16, 2018, 01:41:08 AM |
|
@camthegeek. Yes the site is certainly something I was looking for. Thank you.
In any case, I did not know that there are so many cryptonight light coins! Also, Turtlecoin and Masari have more hashrate than us? I thought we were the king of cryptonight light hehehe.
|
|
|
|
|
bigslimvdub
|
|
December 16, 2018, 06:40:04 PM |
|
@camthegeek. Yes the site is certainly something I was looking for. Thank you.
In any case, I did not know that there are so many cryptonight light coins! Also, Turtlecoin and Masari have more hashrate than us? I thought we were the king of cryptonight light hehehe.
The most hash does not always mean the best coin. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
bbc.reporter
|
|
December 17, 2018, 12:51:37 AM |
|
@camthegeek. Yes the site is certainly something I was looking for. Thank you.
In any case, I did not know that there are so many cryptonight light coins! Also, Turtlecoin and Masari have more hashrate than us? I thought we were the king of cryptonight light hehehe.
The most hash does not always mean the best coin. However, it will always mean that it is more secure than the cryptocoin that has the lesser hashrate. Also, it would always be better to be the more secure coin than to be the better coin. |
|
|
|
coloseum
Member
Offline
Activity: 219
Merit: 10
|
|
December 17, 2018, 01:01:50 PM |
|
@coloseum. However, if another Asic manufacturer creates Asics for Monero and our new proof of work algorithm, would we need to change it again? Is this the downright, best longterm solution to the problem? I reckon, certainly no.
Time will change all things. I got your point, but what next if Monero will stick with ASICs, especially sticking it forerver>? All things change fastly in reality, and much fastly in crypto. |
|
|
|
|
|
bbc.reporter
|
|
December 20, 2018, 12:33:18 AM |
|
@coloseum. Monero would become a more secure cryptocoin with Asics than without them. I reckon Monero is valuable enough to have the other manufacturers interested in also making Asic miners for it besides Bitmain.
|
|
|
|
coloseum
Member
Offline
Activity: 219
Merit: 10
|
|
December 26, 2018, 05:23:29 PM |
|
@coloseum. Monero would become a more secure cryptocoin with Asics than without them. I reckon Monero is valuable enough to have the other manufacturers interested in also making Asic miners for it besides Bitmain.
Thank you for your kindly clarification on the goodness for Monero with ASICs. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
