Now you have pissed me and every other person who is helping develop and build blockchain technology by calling Vertcoin a shitcoin. I don’t think the researchers at MIT who work on it would agree with you. How can you comment on a coin’s potential and technology if you don’t even understand blockchain fundamentals as evidenced by your previous post which you admitted you were wrong about most everything.
Vertcoin was one of the first coins to implement segwit and lightning:
Vertcoin team and MIT is developing the “LitBox” which will revolutionize the way you spend crypto
Quit talking about sh*t you don’t understand. Sorry about being off topic, but couldn’t let that one go.
Back on topic :
It’s not innovation - it’s greed. When we see open source, globally available, programmable ASIC’s, I will buy one. It’s been four years since bitcoin went ASIC, where’s the innovation? competition?
based on his tweets and comments here on these forums I wouldnt get your hopes up… the only reason he seems to now be entertaining a GPU minable chain is so he can get double income, which wont really be double income cause its going to kill the longterm value of ZEC by doubling the supply…
in one of those tweets he said:
“We never committed to trying to resist ASICs. The reason we didn’t was a very good reason: I was uncertain whether that would be possible or desirable.”
Ummm dude,… i have a LOT of screen shots saying otherwise… after following him on twitter for the last year+ i started to think he was a bit off the ball… and yeah… his recent comments show he does not have a good memory…
Can anybody ( maybe any developer ) who has deep knowledge about it, explain what it means to make our baby ASIC-resistant(AR).
Is a hard fork necessary?
Would 3 monthly updates of the algorithm be necessary to keep it AR?
Would work wich is done on sapling become useless if AR is treated with higher priority?
As (felt) 99% of the community in this thread I don’t like this “Chinese high end waste selling monopoly” and don’t want to imagine a future based on its machines. Therefore I could accept these daisy chain solutions, but I don’t get clear how to be sure that there is always only the one chain based on asics and not the second, too. So if it is possible to keep one chain clear why implement the asicchain at all?
After thinking about this topic for a few days (or weeks?) I really don’t see the advantage asics can bring to our all baby, so @zooko could you please fill this big black hole in my mind that I can understand your point of view and why you accept the blockchain becoming a monopoly playground?
One last question : what happens to a daisy chain if one half of the chain has suddenly a hash power of 0?
sorry for my bad english.
We all must clearly understand who bring real money for cryptocurrency community? It’s a darknet users. Cryptocoins replaced dirty cash in life. While the coin be good for darknet, it will be on top, Fast, cheapest and anonymous transactions will be on top. If you want to ZEC be on top, it must be main zchain with half in a year POW algo changing to prevent ASICs control the chain…
mainpont you neglect, asic owner has invested in a mashine for only 1 algo, he cannot switch to diff algo if a 51% attack is created. 51% attack will be easily detected by million of wallets being stolen, real transaction not being confirmed, etc. when this happen the chain for such coin coin can be rolled back and fork, destroying the investment in mashine for this one algo
gpu can just shift to a different coin after causing a 51% attack, they have no loss of utility on many type of coins, so they can afford to attack without any loss of investment in hardware. ASIC have much stronger incentive to be good actors because of risk of loss
crypto is not mainly used by darknet, i buy pizza with crypto, I buy at my local deli with crypto. never once used for any mischief. I am sure some bad actors exists. majority of crypto is hodlers and traders, not drug dealers and terrorist
when the hashrate for ZEC is as high as it is, they can not just switch to another coin after a 51% attack as that other coin’s hashrate would increase so much that GPU mining would no longer be profitable…
what you are suggesting is that GPU miners would commit suicide… no, you are wrong… we are not ZEC co.
it is also next to impossible for a single entity to gain enough GPU hashpower to commit the 51% attack… a pool would have to do it (or group of pools), and we use pools that are trustworthy (cant say the same about ZEC co.)… like flypool, suprnova, and others… they have a reputation behind them… one that they will not break with their users.
Look at E3 hashrate and Z9 mini hashrate. E3 has not competition against GPU’s. But with Z9 Bitmain spit in the face to all GPU miners, because 10000 H/s = 2000$ and the GPU miners buying the GPU’s with the same hashrate from 13000 $. Why Chinese do this? They have a lot of money, more than Nvidia for example. Why they didn’t create a new Dash miner, new S12 SHA256 miner? Because they want to take all mining market, eat all pieces of cake. The Bitmain is really evil for cryptoworld. They will destroy all mining stability and system.
exactly, however much the ETH ASIC is a slight threat to Ethereum… the Z ASIC is a major threat to being taken over… we know bitmain mines with ASICs behind our back before selling them… if they get away with this one, they can create a super powerful one, mine with it behind our back to get ROI and then do a 51% attack to make bank
But he has a lot of $$$ from the Bitmain. He betrayed all of us and changed his words about ASIC-resistance, principles, bla-bla-bla. Businessman Zooko.
haha like i sad when he post first time that he works in bitmain factory…he even know that this new ASIC “sound as human conversation at 1m” even no one has seen it except them and there is no such info on the internet …but he still lies how he is GPU miner but how ASIC is something from the heaven and GPU miners are evil people
we wont know if he sold out as he would just receive payment in Ztransactions… the only way to be sure we have not been sold out is if he keeps the companies word and eliminates any ASICs
they can say they are totally transparent… but with Ztransactions… no one can prove otherwise…
has to keep his word or he obviously can’t be trusted.
Zooko seems willing to listen to our arguments. You can’t expect the developers to come to a decision about a hard fork in just a few days. The Z9s don’t ship until mid June, so we have to figure out a solution.
important thing to keep in mind: traders already don’t like the emission schedule. adding more coins at this point in time would most likely be viewed unfavorably by traders.
based on its machines. Therefore I could accept these daisy chain solutions, but I don’t get clear how to be sure that there is always only the one chain based on asics and not the second, too. So if it is possible to keep one chain clear why implement the asicchain at all?