Ah thanks for clearing that up!
1 Like
Very interesting article:
Most interesting parts of the article:
…
It, of course, brings us to the swindle. A few parties such as Bitmain have misled the community into believing that miners are paid rather than subsidized with the “block reward.” Nodes are paid to include transactions, and it is done using fees. The block subsidy is a degrading temporary measure designed to incentivize the early investment into developing nodes. It helps subsidize the cost that would incur in building a large-scale storage system. But such is not what companies such as Bitmain specialize in creating. Such companies create ASIC chips. They are a small component and not even the major component of a node.
…
The current market players such as Bitmain understand perfectly well that the subsidy will go down and that the value in the next six years needs to come from transactional volume. They do not seek long-term solutions. At present, they are seeking to extract as much value out of the network as possible without reinvesting. They do so by trying to convince fools that the only part of the network that mattered was solving the hash puzzle and that the transaction fees were irrelevant. They do so in getting fools to run inefficient hardware that would not meet the standards of any data center rather than moving towards scaled efficiency.The lie, the misleading of the industry, has been the sale of small home “nodes” that do nothing. They simply allow companies such as Bitmain to sell ASIC-based pet rocks and a few to gain a level of collectivist control over an idle mass of uninformed people (see BTC, ETH).
It is time that people start to see what a node is and how it works and to stop the lies that have formed the foundation of the industry.
3 Likes
those new released ASIC life cycle about half year only…
buy ASIC = give your money to those ASIC miner company only
1 Like
5 Likes
The problem with ASICs is that there is huge market demand for them. Bitmain, Innosilicon and other manufacturers wouldn’t be successful if they didn’t have almost inexhaustible market demand. Making them for in-house use only is a much more risky proposition. Taking pre-orders for customers and using those funds for development is much less risk.
The problem with proof of work in general is not just ASICs. It started with mining pools, which were unforeseen when PoW was developed. The original idea was one cpu one vote. That was removed with pooled mining, and in my opinion that changed the entire dynamics of mining, making it better for individuals (less risk) but worse for the overall health of the coins being mined. When small miners use a pool the essentially lose their immediate vote for protocol changes. Yes, they can switch pools, but what if that pool is the most profitable and the vote is worth less to them than protocol changes? In my opinion, in the early stage of a cryptocurrency, pooled mining is worse than the development of ASICs.
1 Like
while we are hitting almost 100M difficulty, i would like to discuss @zooko decision to go asic friendly.
- do you remember that less power consumption was a strong statement, in pro-asic guy mouth?
but guess what, with 100M difficulty one z11mini produces almost the same ZEC amount as 1080ti @ 8M diff. The only difference is that z11 mini uses 300 watts while 1080ti used 200 watts.
So this is a fail.
-
ZEC/BTC is renewing all time lows. Now going under 0.0099. But i guess for asic supporters there is no connection.
-
90%+ hashrate comes from China. This is pure fail of decentralization. And please, guys, do not waste your time telling that this has nothing to do with asic friendliness.
-
All time low on active adresses. Basically hashrate went 10x, but user activity did opposite.
-
Hardware avaliability… you remember how people were whining about that GPUs were not avaliable for some weeks? Ha, enjoy buying asic from bitmain, brothers.
-
oh how you laughed at me when i predicted that XMR hard fork will actually increase XMR value.
well, you do not laugh now, right?
so to sum up the facts:
- price hitting all time low, comparing to BTC, and other alts.
- difficulty goes through the roof, without any correlation with ZEC\BTC. Basically new asic released - difficulty skyrockets. You can not predict, you are totally under what Bitmain is willing to do.
- 90% of hashrate is coming from China. Wow, this is unexpected, really.
- Amount of active Zcash users rapidly decreases. Coin basically dead.
- the power wasted by asics is already higher than with cards,
fail, fail, fail, fail and fail again.
Every statement for pro-asic has failed. It has impact on the price, on active user count, on decentralization, on everything.
But I guess @zooko still believes that some additional research has to be done. lol.
so sad about what this project has become due to ONE, very poor decision.
2 Likes
Graph, which headline says it all. Zcash, Zooko, you failed big time.
Blue line is difficulty,
Red is addresses with a meaningful balance,
Orange is daily active addresses.
Data from @coinmetrics
3 Likes
The Guy who posted this (referring to the slides) is Pro GPU owns one of the largest GPU mining facilitates in north America of course he would say its a failed network… Side note… I wish there was a dislike function on this forum…
4 Likes
mee too.
Because when people, like you, come in, personally attack the source of information without a single fact, i wish to dislike your post.
Proove him wrong, show your graph.
But you have nothing…
if the data’s correct; doesn’t really matter who the guy is. it’s there for everybody to look at, and analyze for themselves. @nec would you mind posting the source for the “90% hashrate china” point you made. not saying you’re incorrect. would like to start monitoring this myself.
1 Like
https://twitter.com/nic__carter/status/1124377338605703168?s=21 There the link to the original post. Here is a link about the guy who owns it…
https://medium.com/@
And here is a link to his business Atlantic crypto…
http://www.atlanticcrypto.com/
Dude owns one of the largest GPU facilities in North America it would only make sense for him to say the network is failed due to ASICs.
2 Likes
Can you please show graphs of ZEC difficulty, addresses with a meaningful balance and daily active addresses, that actually prove him wrong?
Did I say I have a graph? No I didn’t… IF I owned one of the largest GPU mining facilities in North America and my main coin I mined was taken over by ASICs of course I would say they destroyed the network… Just can’t wait until this coin breaks itself out of the mud and goes where it should be within the top 10. That day will come when? Who knows but eventually it will be here…
in what way the background of that man affects facts which he posted?
do you understand how thick you look?
do you understand that the source of information is mentioned, and you can check all the graphs yourself?
I literally posted the original twitter post you got your graph from. Which was posted in here prior to you or myself posting.
its asic owners who are in a state of war, always.
fighting with gpu miners.
while gpu miners, such as myself, moved on from this project, in about May 2018.
Ok then leave at that I support ASICs you support GPUs.
im not here to support GPU.
im here to discuss factually the impact of asics on ZCASH.
check this out, supporter.
If ASICs are so bad why is BTC dominated by them? The problem isn’t the difficulty of Zcash it’s the price of the coin. If this coin can break out and go to triple digits and STAY there yes eventually the difficulty will matter but if we’re talking right here right now it’s the price that matters more.
1 Like