96.22 Mh/s
20.0%
Nicehash-CryptoNight
CryptoNight
495.54 Mh/s
-3.0%
Do you understand English?
THERE IS NO GPU ON CRYPTONIGHT ..GPYS ARE ON CRYPTONIGHTV7
Mining with Rx 580 GPU on cryptonight would make 0.01$ minus electricity or -0.31$ per card every day
Mining with Rx 580 GPU on cryptonightv7 would make 0.97$ minus electricity or +0.56$ per card every day
My English isn’t the best either, but you don’t seem to realize that
Electroneum / ETN, the attacked coin some days ago is on Cryptonite V7
Then you have some other problems with logic i guess .
Nicehash cryptonight has 5 TIMES more hashrate then cryptonightv7
You still singing that cryptonight is only GPU…which is hilarious when there GPU cant make 1 cent.
There was a patch some days ago it seems and since some days it’s possible for them to mine on Nicehash, enough they are patched.
I admit i wasn’t aware of that patch.
Yes, i was wrong with the cryptonite traffic since thereis a patch since some days that makes it possible to have X3 to mine on cryptonite, at least i admit when i’am wrong 
Still, doesn’t explain your logic how the Electroneum coin on Cryptonite V7 was attacked with Asics
a patch is an update to fix a bug or an actual issue. Don’t know what you are talking about anyways:
You could and can mine with asic on nicehash since forever
No, the X3 didn’t work on nicehash, i never tested it myself as i don’t like nicehash, but read on the forums and reviews (see below). From what i read a custom patch/software with different miner software is needed to have the X3 working on Nicehash as with factory firmware it’s not going work there.
Here the X3 review from Hodl Army regarding the nice hash issue:
So apparently the Antminer X3 does not work properly on NiceHash at the moment, even after flashing the latest available firmware that seemed a day newer than the one on the device we have tested. No go on NiceHash
You talking nonsense and invent things…where did i ever sad that ETN was attacked by Asics.
ETN was not attacked at all…like i sad before they put block times 40 times then it should be…so when diffictl is low nicehash would go in and make money on low diff and diff would go high but because off long block times they put…high difficulty would stay long even when nicehash go and miners go…so people who mine ETN with GPU mine on very high difficulty all the time.
But that is problem with amateur devs not with GPU mining
Look at monero difficulty
…its straight line since the fork.Lol, no, no attack, time spoofing just happens randomly 
Only thing I really disagree with is that statement. Everything else is perspective and speculation. Nobody knows what the devs motivations are, except the devs themselves.
On the statement I disagree with. Question everything. The entire reason Crypto even exists is because we started to question the motivations and actions of the establishment and their bankers. If you want to question the ethics of the devs, you should be free to do so, but you also better be ready to defend that position with evidence based on their actions and/or inaction’s (don’t just make wild accusations and have nothing to substantiate the claim). You should also be ready to have your own ethics called into question (it goes both ways).
I didn’t question the Zcash developers at first. I assumed good faith. Feel free to look at my early posts here.
What concerns me recently is the dishonesty from Zooko.
He’s presented arguments that he knows are false, such as claiming that we don’t know whether an Equihash tweak will invalidate the Z9s (it will) or whether increasing the memory requirements to 2gb or more will reduce the effectiveness of future ASICs (it will). He’s also claimed that tweaking the Equihash parameters is a complex process that requires months of research, when in fact it’s a very simple change that many smaller altcoins have already implemented. And then he goes one step further by considering a completely new proof of work algorithm and overseeing hardware production for it! So Zcash doesn’t have the resources to change a few lines in the source code, but they have the resources to design a fundamentally new proof of work algorithm and get into hardware manufacturing? It doesn’t add up.
It’s very clear that Zooko wants ASICs for Zcash, yet he’s never given any logical reason why, and he acts if the issue is still being debated. He can’t admit his support for ASICs because it’s a complete betrayal to GPU miners as well as a blow to his integrity.
I don’t see why it’s implausible that he’s come to some sort of agreement with ASIC manufacturers. This is becoming the most likely explanation for the inconsistency of his actions.
Pretty unfair post after you left the most valid reasons Zooko mentioned totally out of your “accusation”:
The above is the least you should have to include into a fair post (but it seems to much asked)
And actually you should have included these points as well as you mention other altcoins that forked:
from the BTG equihash-BTG paper:
It’s a short term solution they have for now. Why should a multimillion dollar project like Zcash waste all invested resources into overwinter/sapling for some weaks break just to face eventually the same problem again? While it makes from your POW no sense, from a business and dev point of view it actually makes a lot of sense.
And here is the unfairness which comes with your post as [moderation edit by @daira: personal attack deleted] you make only the secret deal/bribery/corruption a valid option for what the majority of the Zcash people in charge have choosen to do.
And as a side note. While that BTG titanic coin that is sinking faster than a stone in water has absolutly nothing to lose things are different at Zcash, obviously! Not that many here care about the things that Zcash is brining on its way, obviously!
Boxalex,
I’m hesitant to respond to your posts because you have a tendency to ignore points I make as well as to derail this thread into arguments about irrelevant topics. For instance, you have completely ignored my argument that the lack of highly efficient ASICs for Ethereum shows that the Ethereum algorithm is quite resistant to custom hardware.
Anyway, how do you explain how Monero, which has no 20% developer fee as well as a 3x larger market cap, was able to fork away from ASICs almost immediately? It doesn’t take millions of dollars and hundreds of man hours to correct the Equihash parameters. The Zcash team could even find a volunteer to do this, like they did for the Zcash Windows wallet.
The argument that Zcash is too busy to fix the proof of work algorithm does not hold water. Second, even if they were busy, they could commit to correcting the proof of work algorithm after they are done with the current network upgrades. They won’t do that either. They will, however, commit to designing a centralized Rube Goldberg mining scheme that completely violates the idea of decentralization. Again, it doesn’t add up.
Actually you didn’t respond to my post in any way. You just avoided everything i mentioned there, from overwinter up to whatever.
And while you accuse me of derailing, just review your answer. While i talk about zcash devs which you accused you come with some Monero and Ethereum stuff.
Moordrik has fitted it pretty well, to accuse something is easy to do, to back it up or keep a better standard and ethics for that is a different story. Your post is the best example for that. Easy of accusation everybody that doesn’t fit/agree your views, but you do the very same thing, you just aren’t aware of it, no idea why, maybe just lack of fairness.
[moderation edit by @daira: personal attack deleted]
Your argument is similar to this:
“The Zcash developers do not have the resources – time or money – to work on an adjustment of the Equihash parameters.”
You are making a few assumptions, but the biggest assumption is the following:
“Tweaking the Equihash parameters requires a non-trivial amount of resources relative to the Zcash monetary and temporal budget.”
This is the assumption I am disputing. My evidence is the fact that the Monero developers, who have a much, much smaller budget and likely a smaller team, have already managed to fork away from ASICs. Your counter-argument might be that Zcash has more at stake because it such a valuable cryptocurrency. However, Monero is a larger and more popular cryptocurrency (according to Google searches and Coin Gecko). There are, of course, very small Equihash coins that have managed to fork away from ASICs, such as BTG and BTCz. This would undermine the “lack of resources” argument, but your “too much at stake” counter-argument would be valid here. Monero violates both the “lack of resources” assumption as well as your counter-argument.
So the key assumption you are making is false, which means your entire argument falls apart.
The Zcash developers cannot defend their inaction against ASICs by claiming they do not have the resources to work on a tweak of the Equihash parameters.
Boxalex is obviously paid to spam the forum with irrelevant stuff and mostly tottaly false.
He does not have arguments…just to post more post.
I’m getting the same impression.
Even if he’s not a paid shill, he should be banned for spamming the forum.
I hope for his sake that he gets paid for what he’s doing, because that is a lot less pathetic than doing it for free.
sure, and the arguments from the election panel which in majority voted against as well, lol.
Every argument doesn’t hold other than your conspiracy/bribery/corruption theory, lol.
Whatever dude, if you are that sure that your conspiracy theory is the only possible valid one, so it be.
That would fit perfectly your needs, right? Nobody opposing conspiracy theories, lol. I’am sorry, but this is not going to happen that an active member will get banned for sharing opinions, opposing conspiracy, whatever, it would be even boring, not? 
Just shows again the argument level of the hardliners here, everybody that isn’t pro-gpu is automaticly:
That’s the part of some fun, now seriously: Tell me how low must someone get to ask for a ban just because someone is of different opinion following all forum rules?
Just for education:
Actually to be sure if actively taking part in a forum is considered spamming i looked it up in the Cambridge dictionary: the activity of sending advertisements by email to people who do not want to receive them
P.S.: Thx for the motivation, sometimes i really thought about writing that much, but such posts and censorship attempts give me a bonus motivation
