This is different although the Ethereum PoS dev says no Bueno, too probabilistic, whitepaper says otherwise
Edit - here’s the white paper, maybe with Starks? Idk
https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmUy4jh5mGNZvLkjies1RWM4YuvJh5o2FYopNPVYwrRVGV
I read the white paper on that, assuming the security parameters hold, it’s pretty neat setup, it doesn’t appear to require any specialized equipment other than a computer running a node which means no asic or gpus, it is very green (I saw an article yesterday about how JUST Bitcoin mining power consumption in 2018 is supposed to be 0.5% of the entire worlds power consumption, yuk), any thoughts?
Assumption, in my opinion. If you fork ZCash, I believe you will find it’s the opposite. You will see ZCash drop similar to what Monero dropped on it’s fork.
I’m sure you would love double Dev fees. There’s a conflict of interest in my opinion.
All the more reason to stay away from the ASIC’s. GPU’s can be easily obtained in most countries and not banned as ASIC’s can be banned. Which would further ensure those ASIC’s become more centralized by large companies such as BITMAIN.
Why do you continue to make posts in ZCash Forum seemingly promoting ASIC’s?
Currently, BITMAIN IS HUMONGOUS and GPU’s are few!!! It’s the exact opposite of what you’re saying in regards to mining. Fork ZCash and watch the network hash rate dwindle by 50% at a minimum. I’ll bet you one ZEC that’s what will occur the moment it’s forked.
We currently have Pro-ASIC users coming into the forum making an argument for BITMAIN in order to maintain their 50+ percent share of the network hash rate. Fork it and you’ll see what I mean. Some coming into the forum may be paid by Bitmain to market ASIC’s for them.
1 Like
Is this your reasoning by not wanting to fork? We already have ZCL. Will it harm ZEC [Very good developers by the way] if another fork were to occur that did not have as high caliber of developers?
Well, you currently have approximately 90% in favor of GPU’s and you appear to be standing up for the 8% who will NEVER grow to as high as GPU’s and the 2% who are undecided or don’t care.
WHY?
Do you not have an ECONOMIC conflict of interest with the potential for DOUBLE the Developer Fees?
The appearance of this isn’t good, Zooko. It’s just not, sir. YOUR OWN ECONOMIC INTEREST ARE ALSO AT PLAY HERE AREN"T THEY? Be honest now…
Your OWN economic interest is threatening those who have already invested tremendously for this project. I would have bought VEGA’s instead of NVIDIA’s to mine Monero instead of ZEC if I had known ZCash would not hold true to there declaration for ASIC-Resistance to the community. I believe MANY other GPU miners here would say the same.
While talking about others who have economic incentives to lobby one way or another, he (Zooko) also has his own economic incentive with double fees. Which would harm revenues of GPU miners to gratify his own “conflicted” interests economically.
2 Likes
there is nothing to argue or debate here. 90% supports gpu for some kind of decentralization. The only question is why the FUCK the fork to a non-asic-algo is being delayed for so long?
2 Likes
i think if you read everything, the answer is there already.
Should we ask BTG how much hash power ASICs can bring to bear against them?
This was interesting, it concerns PoS vulnerabilities of long range attacks
Certain aspects of zcash make it resistant to certain kinds of these attacks if it were PoS but it was still interesting
This is about sybil network attack resistance
This really doesn’t make a positive case for staking (in general)
1 Like
Heres his thread PoS thread, pretty good
1 Like