From: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
Daniele Pinna <daniele.pinna@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Dev-list's stance on potentially altering the PoW algorithm
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 21:31:21 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201510022131.22411.luke@dashjr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEgR2PFQtr78B3t147=3Ko4VnTGevb0QCySk=hDSqeFHZk=MPQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Friday, October 02, 2015 8:02:43 AM Daniele Pinna via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> I am however interested in the dev-list's stance on potentially
> altering the bitcoin PoW protocol should an algorithm that guarantees
> protection from ASIC/FPGA optimization be found.
>
> I assume that, given the large amount of money invested by some miners into
> their industrial farms this would represent a VERY contentious hard fork.
>
> It is, however, also true that a novel optimization-resistant algorithm
> could greatly ameliorate decentralization in the bitcoin network due to a
> resurgence of desktop/cellphone mining.
>
> Where do the core devs stand on this matter, hypothetical as it may be?
Besides ASIC-proof being even tehoretically impossible, assuming we had a PoW
that worked using mere RAM-as-the-ASIC, this would probably not be good in
the long term for decentralisation, as it is only a matter of time until
botnets would bankrupt all the legitimate miners out of operation.
Restarting the mining with a new algorithm as a reaction and defence against
centralised hoarding of mining ASICs (as we are seeing now), would be
acceptable. It would not necessarily be contentions *to the economy*, as such
hoarding-miners do not participate in the economy in any meaningful way (they
do not accept payments from other bitcoin users).
Luke
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-02 21:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-02 8:02 [bitcoin-dev] Dev-list's stance on potentially altering the PoW algorithm Daniele Pinna
2015-10-02 8:20 ` Jorge Timón
2015-10-02 8:30 ` Adam Back
2015-10-02 8:31 ` Daniele Pinna
2015-10-02 10:46 ` NxtChg
2015-10-02 11:00 ` Jorge Timón
2015-10-02 16:38 ` Peter R
[not found] ` <CALqxMTH6r8eJN2Xw+nn1z=6x9Q3TRSQQ6ZMXsmHPyX8dNx+EgA@mail.gmail.com>
2015-10-02 8:30 ` Daniele Pinna
2015-10-02 16:45 ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-10-02 21:37 ` Dave Scotese
2015-10-02 21:31 ` Luke Dashjr [this message]
2015-10-02 23:19 ` Milly Bitcoin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201510022131.22411.luke@dashjr.org \
--to=luke@dashjr.org \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=daniele.pinna@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox