Why do you guys keep trying to evade the issue?
We don’t need “transparency” from ASIC makers.
We want Equihash to be corrected so that it is memory hard like it was supposed to be. If the team fixed this, we wouldn’t have ASICs in the first place.
6 Likes
You have to realize your wasting your time here. They don’t care any of the people that help zcash get to where it is. Always remember without the gpu miners zcash be no where!
2 Likes
The fault was made. So stop all to complain or so. If Zcash now gets memory hard, ASIC manufactures become angry and the price of Zcash will fall under 0. I believe they would have the power to do so. I have no numbers, but it is kind of logical.
edit: ahh and all my zcash I mined will be for nothing at all.
Your idea has no sense: Monero’s price after anti-ASIC hardfork had the same trends as Dash or Ethereum
You only show the trend, not the price …
I never thought of this…
Well… I guess I know a coin that in 2020 is going full PoS 
I’ve just wanted to show that all altcoins new and old, GPU-, CPU- or ASIC- based has no matter for the market price. Bitcoin influences much more cause majority get altcoins on exchage in pairs with BTC.
P.S And yes - PC-based mining can’t beat this trend right now but this is one of the shortest ways to it. E.g 2nd coin in my country’s local exchanges was Litecoin(when it was GPU-driven), 3rd - Ethereum, 4th - Dash(also when it was GPU-driven), 5th - Zcash. It hasn’t changed too much, but at least it’s something.
While it had the same trend Monero had the biggest loses … I took the time with my coffee to make some calculation:
Period 07.03.2018 - 13.06.2018
BTC $10,428 $6579 -37%
Zcash: $365 $197 -46%
Dash: $550 $260 -52%
Monero $344 $125 -64%
I agree with you that the trends are up to Bitcoin, just logical, but the prices are calculated even within a trend diffrently as you can see on the little chart/calculation above…
1 Like
Ethereum 780 - 475 -39%. Bigger bitcoin pair market - bigger bitcoin correlation. It’s natural and actually both Monero and Ethereum prices has almost zero connection with Bitmain. And I hope it will stay the same in future and also for Zcash.
While i got the logic for Ethereum i didn’t get it for Monero, it’s the biggest loser in price after the fork … so where is the deal?
24h volume:
ETH $1 984 300 000
DASH $83 287 200
ZEC $55 983 000
XMR $40 651 600
Price loss is more connected with trading volume and there is also a small connection with mining-based hype arround it. So that bigger market ASIC-based DASH lost more than smaller GPU-based Zcash market. Monero lost most because of it’s low trading volume.
Here is my explanation.
P.S Ethereum’s volume is overvalued on coinmarketcap(where I took it). Because of non-BTC pair trades. But this overvalue supports the idea of less losses of non-BTC paired currencies.
I added Ethereum in the little calculation so it fits yours. Now we have price and volume compared for the same period but i see a different result.
However, Monero is the biggest loser the last 3 months in every aspect …
And here is my explaination: While everybody right bevor the fork saw monero skyrocketing going to the moon i predicted that price will go down. It’s actually something we see all the time on such anti-asic forks. The problem seems to be the Miner think that IF their profitably rises the price of a given coin will as well, which is a totally false assumption and plain wrong as we see in the calculation anyway black on white…
Period 07.03.2018 - 13.06.2018
Bitcoin: $10,428 $6579 = -37%
Volume: 8.3B - 4.7B = -43.37
Ethereum: $782 - $495 = -36.70%
Volume: 2.1B - 2.B = -4.76%
Zcash: $365 - $197 = -46%
Volume: 58M - 61M = +5.17%
Dash: $550 - $260 = -52%
Volume: 124M - 83.6M = -32.58%
Monero
Price: $344 - $125 = -64%
Volume: 154M - 40.5M = -73.70%
But coming to the start of this research:
The fault was made. So stop all to complain or so. If Zcash now gets memory hard, ASIC manufactures become angry and the price of Zcash will fall under 0. I believe they would have the power to do so. I have no numbers, but it is kind of logical.
edit: ahh and all my zcash I mined will be for nothing at all.
I think I’ve proven that ASIC manufactures have no power to destroy coin economy if coin devs decide to fork against them. And I still believe that community benefits from Monero’s hardfork were huge. And no price fall can deny them. When market goes up, Monero will join. But they have shown that it’s possible to resist big companies and prevent them from getting too big part of cake.
1 Like
I totally agree with Manufactors not having the power to destroy a coin economy.
About Monero, i have a different stance. In my principal opinion a project that relys on bot networks and is fine with that shouldn’t have a place under the crypto sun at all. But it’s not me to decide, but i admit i’am more than happy to see their price goes down constantly lowering at least the bot net profits …
That fork, bevor getting rid of the bot networks, was the biggest mistake they could make (price wise of course), ideologically it seems to fit perfectly of course, lol.
Don’t lose your keys 
1 Like
Cryptonight was designed to be even GPU-resistant so botnets there looked like inevitable evil till Vegas came and separated profits between CPUs and GPUs so that both are happy. It’s also cool that it works better on AMD CPUs with lower market share than Intel’s so creating botnets with huge hashrate share right now is almost impossible. Coinhive gives no more than 1/4 of possible. 1 Intel core give nearly 10 H/s on Coinhive or 40 H/s on normal miner. So hackers need from 10,000,000 to 40,000,000 Intel cores(or 7,000,000 to 28,000,000 Ryzen’s) stable online to be able to perform attack on Monero. ARM on IoT devices give even less. So we can be sure that network is secure and majority of profit goes to fair miners. Personally I mine Monero only on my Ryzen 7 1700 with 500 H/s when I don’t have hard CPU load from other applications. It gives only 50 cents/day. But I am happy to support such a community-oriented project.
When hash rate goes down a miner’s break-even point becomes lower, and leads to more selling pressure, which what we’re seeing with Monero. Centralization aside, I also believe Monero could have benefited from ASIC’s for 1 reason, Botnets. Monero is the go to coin for malware infection attempts/background browser mining.
I believe in Monero’s project, but the botnets will eventually need to be dealt with even if that doesn’t involve ASIC’s.
1 Like
It’s interesting to note that some memory hard PoWs can be upgraded (to ever higher memory requirements) by a mere soft fork.
4 Likes
Is it not the case that a more general ASIC could adapt to that situation? If it were announced far enough in advance (6 months) then this is something manufacturers could plan for.
The outcome of this might be a situation similar to Ethereum where GPUs exist alongside more power efficient ASICs. In this case it would just reduce the gap between them.
The goal of raising memory requirements is to deter single-chip ASICs in favor of simpler memory-controller like ASICs that connect commodity memory chips together (I suspect the E3 ethash miner works like that). Such ASICs only need to run efficient enough to saturate the limited memory bandwidth/latency. With power consumption and cost dominated by that of the memory chips, and the roles of ASIC design skills and fab access diminished, miner manufacturers can hopefully compete on more equal terms.
5 Likes