MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAKzdR-pFZGsQZPrHRbJhviFemSLPf8Bo6UWSaaQ-BurCsnAAWw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20160510185728.GA1149@fedora-21-dvm>
	<CAE-z3OWvLqONwaN+608jBn9=q1yUvU4ggGrMpA8rE6qmjDQHtg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKzdR-ou2FYjjxmRBLARhvfhHO-46weiMc2Q2f+GZf1E_JUEAg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKzdR-pFZGsQZPrHRbJhviFemSLPf8Bo6UWSaaQ-BurCsnAAWw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Marek Palatinus <marek@palatinus.cz>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 15:08:57 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJna-HjM-4D4EXMkeSSquRT3r0TMWd+zL8ZRZZ5iQfesqZdB2g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sergio Demian Lerner <sergio.d.lerner@gmail.com>, 
	Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c060c164dc27c053290c06d
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Making AsicBoost irrelevant
Precedence: list

--94eb2c060c164dc27c053290c06d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Ehm, I though those discussions about "ASICs are bad, because X" ended
years ago by starting "ASIC unfriendly" altcoins. ASIC industry is twisted
even without AsicBoost. I don't see any particular reason why to change
rules just because of 10% edge.

This is opening Pandora box and it is potentially extremely dangerous for
the health of the network. You cannot know in advance what you'll break by
changing the rules.

Disclaimer: I don't have any stake in any ASIC company/facility.

slush

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Sergio Demian Lerner via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 6:43 PM, Sergio Demian Lerner <
> sergio.d.lerner@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> You can find it here:
>> https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2014/03/18/the-re-design-of-the-bitcoin-block-header/
>>
>> Basically, the idea is to put in the first 64 bytes a 4 byte hash of the
>> second 64-byte chunk. That design also allows increased nonce space in the
>> first 64 bytes.
>>
>> My mistake here. I didn't recalled correctly my own idea. The idea is to
> include in the second 64-byte chunk a 4-byte hash of the first chunk, not
> the opposite.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>

--94eb2c060c164dc27c053290c06d
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">Ehm, I though those discussions about &quot;ASICs are bad,=
 because X&quot; ended years ago by starting &quot;ASIC unfriendly&quot; al=
tcoins.=C2=A0ASIC industry is twisted even without AsicBoost. I don&#39;t s=
ee any particular reason why to change rules just because of 10%=C2=A0edge.=
<div><br></div><div>This is opening Pandora box and it is potentially extre=
mely dangerous for the health of the network. You cannot know in advance wh=
at you&#39;ll break by changing the rules.</div><div><br></div><div>Disclai=
mer: I don&#39;t have any stake in any ASIC company/facility.</div><div><br=
></div><div>slush</div></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"g=
mail_quote">On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Sergio Demian Lerner via bitco=
in-dev <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfound=
ation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt;<=
/span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8=
ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div c=
lass=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><span class=3D"">On Tue=
, May 10, 2016 at 6:43 PM, Sergio Demian Lerner <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a hr=
ef=3D"mailto:sergio.d.lerner@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">sergio.d.lerner@g=
mail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=
=3D"ltr"><div><div><div><div><br><div><br></div>You can find it here: <a hr=
ef=3D"https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2014/03/18/the-re-design-of-the-bitcoin=
-block-header/" target=3D"_blank">https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2014/03/18/=
the-re-design-of-the-bitcoin-block-header/</a><br></div><div><br></div>Basi=
cally, the idea is to put in the first 64 bytes a 4 byte hash of the second=
 64-byte chunk. That design also allows increased nonce space in the first =
64 bytes. <br><br></div></div></div></div></blockquote></span><div>My mista=
ke here. I didn&#39;t recalled correctly my own idea. The idea is to includ=
e in the second 64-byte chunk a 4-byte hash of the first chunk, not the opp=
osite. <br><div><br></div></div></div></div></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.=
linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>

--94eb2c060c164dc27c053290c06d--