1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
|
Return-Path: <luke@dashjr.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C54CD1B92
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 2 Oct 2015 21:31:53 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from zinan.dashjr.org (zinan.dashjr.org [192.3.11.21])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A99028F
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 2 Oct 2015 21:31:53 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown
[IPv6:2001:470:5:265:61b6:56a6:b03d:28d6])
(Authenticated sender: luke-jr)
by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C123310801D0;
Fri, 2 Oct 2015 21:31:23 +0000 (UTC)
X-Hashcash: 1:25:151002:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org::ibd/3nCGAhjAJdVl:1U1J
X-Hashcash: 1:25:151002:daniele.pinna@gmail.com::ySYvcoT+wBuI+Xv9:Q1vF
From: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
Daniele Pinna <daniele.pinna@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 21:31:21 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/4.1.6-gentoo; KDE/4.14.8; x86_64; ; )
References: <CAEgR2PFQtr78B3t147=3Ko4VnTGevb0QCySk=hDSqeFHZk=MPQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAEgR2PFQtr78B3t147=3Ko4VnTGevb0QCySk=hDSqeFHZk=MPQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: E463 A93F 5F31 17EE DE6C 7316 BD02 9424 21F4 889F
X-PGP-Key-ID: BD02942421F4889F
X-PGP-Keyserver: hkp://pgp.mit.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201510022131.22411.luke@dashjr.org>
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD
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] Dev-list's stance on potentially altering the PoW
algorithm
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2015 21:31:53 -0000
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
|
