Again, that’s YOUR problem for ASSUMING I’m shouting when I capitalize some words. I capitalize for EMPHASIS.
I actually agree with that statement. That still has nothing to do with declaration of ASIC Resistance and the moment ASIC’s come on the scene the leader of ZCashCo. initially comes out in support of ASIC’s and doesn’t even apparently want to even TRY to RESIST the moment the first threat arrives. At least that’s the impression most of us who are Pro-GPU perceived.
1 Like
Something I think that needs to be pointed out, yes those coins have said publicly that they are ASIC resistant and would stay as such and that is it.
Zen has also come out and said that until sapling they would not fork.
As for all the other coins has said they would fork, that’s ALL that have said and that’s it. No time line, no information so that mining software can be updated, nothing. So this conversation of they are going to fork and why are you not is tiring and as for them going to fork until they release information is nothing but smoke and mirrors and talk.
Even Zcash said they would like to fork, but not until sapling, and not until they find out how the Z9 mini is made and what they could possible do to prevent having to fork again.
and AGAIN if Zcash doesn’t fork you are out NOTHING, point to many of the alleged coins that are going to fork.
This is not coming from someone who is pro ASIC this is coming from someone saying stop saying the same tired things.
First it was make an announcement, over and over and over… and now an announcement has been made by the foundation and yet the same tired things keep being said…
1 Like
This is you talking about something to occur AFTER the declaration of ASIC-Resistance. A purchaser of 10 x Z9’s is someone who wants to come into the game CHANGING THE RULES OF THE GAME.
3 Likes
I have not said one person is better than another. However, I am saying we have “persons” who want to change the rules of the game.
1 Like
That’s what we’re doing now, aren’t we?
Who says the PoW change has to be “messed up?” Are you saying it’s impossible to get it right even with due diligence to TRY to resist? If so, where’s your support?
I can see your logic there. You make a good point. However, have I not mentioned more than just Z-Cash here? Did I not also mention other Privacy coins who INTEND to fork off ASIC’s. The excellent coins of the Equihash algorithm is one of the remaining few profitable for your everyday GPU miner. It’s GPU’s final stand you might say. That’s what’s at threat here. It’s much larger of a deal than some may realize.
I hope this helps. 
You make a valid point but why does it have to be “smoke and mirrors?” What am I hiding because that’s what “smoke and mirrors” implies?
ZCash is the biggest of those in the Equihash algorithm. What ZCashCo and ZCash Foundation have to say on the issue really matters. It’s HUGE for GPU mining and you know this full well. That’s why we have so many posts here in this forum. A viable future for decentralized mining with GPU’s is being threatened and you know this.
If you’re tired of them, simply ignore me. Easy enough, isn’t it?
Then maybe I’m confused and need clarification. Who runs the show? ZCashCo or ZCash Foundation? Are they both working together? It’s a legitimate question. Cause I HONESTLY do not know. That’s what I’m also trying to figure out.
Also, if someone comes on here continuing to promote pro-ASIC, can I not continue to promote Pro-GPU? If you’re growing tired of it, simply stop reading a post if it’s something you’re tired of and move on to the next post.
2 Likes
I’m curious, is this implying if ZCash were to support ASIC’s, there would probably be a “schism” in the beginning but everything will be alright?
Is this implying you believe ZCash would be fine if it supported ASIC’s because you have a patent on a logo?
EDIT: "These recent comments by Zooko is WHY I made the initial post I received response to.
Do NOT think I’m trying to stir up division or start an argument. Cause I’m not. I’m simply trying to understand if an implication is hidden within those statements OR if I’m simply trying to read to much into it. That’s all…
3 Likes
They can’t mine Bitcoin Gold. They have no incentive not to attack it. They were the first coin to come out and say they are hard forking to prevent the Z9 from mining BTG. Check out the twitter when Bitmain announced the Z9. Also, BTG split from BTC because of Bitmain. BTG was the highest market cap equihash coin before the Gemini announcement, making the Z9 a less attractive buying opportunity. The attack wouldn’t be to gain any revenue, but to punish the BTG devs. They have mined empty blocks on BTC in the past. There is motive and opportunity for them to perform this attack.
7 Likes
Just generally. What you see as a threat, someone else might not see as a threat.
And Mistfpga has formulated very clear that the best option on what to do is to analyze the situation first, in depth and not act on emotions only. From a Business, investors and project success point of view that is the right decision NOT to risk the whole project or gamble around.
After the (hopefully successfull) deployment of sapling, winterover and the research of asic impact there is still room for an asic resistant move, other options, whatever not, even including POS.
This said, your threat is not a as big threat to the zcash team for example which have different priorities.
And just to adress your “gpu miner skin thingie” without making another 10 replies. It’s not that you all volunteered for that investing with your hardware and electricity providing it for free for the Zcash project.
And just as a side note, that is something the moderators and other people eventually work on the project, as volunteers, and these deserve a bit more respect than latly has been shown by the soooo skinny gpu community!!
And to adress “changing the rules”. This is something that happens all the time, continously everywhere. Just in generally. If you do not change the rules you will fall behindl. Compare it with industrialization, not far away that compare by the way. But thanks to it, we are where we are, be it for good or bad.
A company, enterprise, corporation, even law enforcements and whatever not have the right to change rules and adopt to a given changed situation. This is something normally and i doubt it’s the last time you see it, actually you see it daily in real life somewhere.
And the forking projects/coins, every projects makes it’s own decisions. Some have nothing to lose, some have nothing in developement and can spend free resources, some use the anti-asic train as it has some popularity of course, some others just follow others without own mind, and than some others have different approaches, visions, targets. You never should compare in a given situation 2 projects, like in real life, what could be good for your friend could be devastating for yourself…
P.S.: Any chance when you reply that you make it in 1 or 2 posts? It was some sort of hazzle to go through all these splitted answer posts you made one after one, not even talking about the caps which are a pain for every normal reader… Just some suggestions to have a better forum and conversation.
3 Likes
If there is a rule that states I must keep it to 1 or 2 replies, please link me to it. If not and it’s a hassle to you to respond, then why bother?
[Moderator edit by @daira: there is no rule, because such a rule would be difficult to formulate without false positives. However, many replies saying essentially the same thing are not productive and don’t add to the discussion. Also, emphasized text (using asterisks for the markup) is easier to read than caps.]
Here’s the main reason for my continued discussion of this here. Because Zooko CONTINUES to speak the same thing. WHY? Because there is a CONFLICT of interest.
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 INCENTIVE (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.
3 Likes
Really? Have a look at my most recent post in regards to Zooko having an Economic Conflict of interest that threatens what GPU Miners invested.
Are you going to say that’s not “relevant” as well?
No, i guess there aren’t any rules, hence it was and is only a suggestion and you are free to take a good advice or not of course.
I’am pretty sure that splitted multiple x answers written with a lot of capital letters aren’t inviting to forum readers you are actually targeting.
IF your intention is that as less as possible people should read it, as many as possible readers should pass and not bother even reading, fine, just forget what i wrote and just continue like that…
2 Likes
What you deem as good as advice is a matter of opinion.
Opinion.
EDIT: Notice how I came back one after one to edit and include in this post. What’s the difference? If you find it irritating to read, then don’t read.
Once again, “opinion.” Some like short and sweet and don’t read long write ups. Some don’t mind reading long posts. Simply “opinion.”
I agree with that 100%. No problem with that. What I have a problem with is Zooko STILL going around apparently trying to market the acceptance of ASIC’s because I personally believe he has his own conflict of interest ECONOMICALLY by trying to promote two chains (one for ASIC and one for GPU) and receiving TWO (DOUBLE) the dev fees. This threatens those who have invested in GPU’s. This was mentioned in a previous post of mine above.
1 Like