Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1D5B267 for ; Wed, 11 May 2016 22:17:07 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-pa0-f48.google.com (mail-pa0-f48.google.com [209.85.220.48]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BBA7123 for ; Wed, 11 May 2016 22:17:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pa0-f48.google.com with SMTP id bt5so21727303pac.3 for ; Wed, 11 May 2016 15:17:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bitcartel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=0mowbRzo3qZI3SXxCGCWK4sLMzT8v3gmPQZkRszL5Kk=; b=eiinwpvs4WXqJYUn0s/Mzty1sppLVuY2hsIyb7S2N9Q5tSlXrmL3qNQe6Lsuib1buq V1OM9+BlSYQ3HgHtX+7F3k07lJJCJli5uczyC5ltdiqidDH5Y4za/qH8d4F6l3SK1ZEr dJTayrAgJ1nLUEKihkUK076jaFc3CgvOftSYclRVPL1hKjM+Tgws9iXuNG16cKRDUVwU vZbWu37ZEJMyx0tL8YOAhDfSZV80JidxOXJSbCcf5DSBwFtMilPvhLFZTsOMNhPMCfUZ N2RaDrxevG1lrQm7fFYxys2ebTyoRS8E279fFdpDpIB85gRSlTOKPSR1b2XSzMMCn7jK Lp6w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=0mowbRzo3qZI3SXxCGCWK4sLMzT8v3gmPQZkRszL5Kk=; b=bAP7xhdAJUstGiZyKZ/scLxJc3Ee7VYINExv3EqqK2HPu7D8lvq9Kn64ov5wrmNWSn NxkJgVT03K6C1DNslx/F0n4C7CkcJZZwXyTbLJDZsdfb6ozPZxfdOPcGpuBhKZFCaP/Q eRlFQLBJh+P0KfBXZTY+Kdn+ZFvJRXGhkBtFXLeMblMOs+ro49NJV7Whh8h6eZ7HviIF T5AfcWCGx8CHX/BlKsItm8ITL3RWRelW1EbAwyWxtJnKNFI7XsQaBmfwxiGZmjIYql9N 1zNTwDOl+ZI3wKcLa7D8CUxvNrUWlYbD+kz9DKN1yeYb4m0OuKXZR+i8rC8qaoo3uIcL BI/g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FU7Evejxeo8qXEVf1KHkhnlhxfE1O84LsRzjxuAN89xly09SOvXmcB+Kl33rwsyCg== X-Received: by 10.66.122.139 with SMTP id ls11mr8668164pab.14.1463005027021; Wed, 11 May 2016 15:17:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.48] (173-11-70-186-SFBA.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [173.11.70.186]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id 71sm14589786pfy.32.2016.05.11.15.16.59 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 11 May 2016 15:17:00 -0700 (PDT) To: Matt Corallo , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion , Marek Palatinus , Sergio Demian Lerner References: <20160510185728.GA1149@fedora-21-dvm> <57339DC5.7060704@mattcorallo.com> From: Simon Liu Message-ID: <5733AF5A.6070207@bitcartel.com> Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 15:16:58 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <57339DC5.7060704@mattcorallo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Making AsicBoost irrelevant X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 22:17:07 -0000 On 05/11/2016 02:01 PM, Matt Corallo via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Indeed, I think the "ASICs are bad, because 1-CPU-1-vote" arguments > mostly died out long ago, and, indeed, the goal that many making those > arguments had of building "unoptimizeable" ASICs failed with them. Discussion quietened down but never went away. With centralization of mining in China, the topic is up for discussion again. For example, Z.Cash will now use Equihash as their proof-of-work scheme. > giving one > manufacturer/licenser a huge influence in who is successful in a market > that we're all relying on remaining rather flat. Central planning is a slippery slope. Let the market decide the winners and losers. It's not feasible to hard fork every time an innovation or perceived unfair advantage appears in the space. --Simon