Some are begging one person, because they believe he’s the final say…which is not supposed to be the case. I’m here stomping my foot making it known that if they continue to delay even making a decision, the decision will be made for them by Bitmain.
Edits: spelling, grammar, and god know sentence structure.
HA! That’s another issue - TX speed! Since it takes more than a few seconds to get a ZEC payment confirmed, no retailer will touch it for POP sales.
My concern is not only that with ASICs we must trust a dubious actor, mining will tend to centralization and that the network could be attacked by government acts, but also with price stability and speed of transactions.
Do ASICs help TX speed? Do ASICs mean lower fees? Long term value stability?
A few seconds means nothing. I stand at the POS station and wait almost a minute for the chip card to validate and confirm a transaction now. Crypto cards are an effective means to use crypto in the commerce space today. But the coin needs to be stable, and the TX fees have to be free of being gamed. Big ASIC farms have already shown they will do exactly that…to extract maximum profit.
But there’s a layer between the buyer and seller using a card. What about a POP sale with a buyer who wants to make a Z => Z transaction with the seller? A goal of the ZCash Co is Z transactions only. Those take time. Will ASICs help that from the Buyer/Seller point of view?
I’m not sure if people realize this.
Bitmain is most likely able to perform a 51% attack - since they are able to produce the required solution rate.
Just do the math.
The fact that they are selling ASICs and not ‘hiding them’ says something.
There is a strong arguments for ASICs: they are much closer to the upper bound of practically achievable performance.
There’s another issue with the ASIC business and the representations the ZCash CO made early on with respect to ASIC resistance. That issue is based on TRUST. Since cryptos are supposed to be “TRUSTLESS” any time the user community is called on to “TRUST US”, the statements made by the ACTORS can only be read in the light most favorable to the READER who is asked to “TRUST THEM”.
Think like this: @Zooko said something like “I didn’t make a social contract…” No, the remarks made early on about ZCAsh’s intention to be “ASIC resistant” is a statement that nevertheless the calls on the reader (SUPPORTER) of ZCash to TRUST. I don’t think it is ethical to make statements asking for a degree of trust and reliance from another and then to say, “well, I didn’t actually promise, therefore I can do what I want…” When the whole VERY SYSTEM is supposed to be based on TRUST NOT BEING REQUIRED.
I hope I can be clear on this. Any time a trust-less system asks for trust from the user base, any official remarks from the actors must be read most favorably to the supporters. You can’t mince words when you imply you want trust at first, then get it, only to say later on when that trust must be honored to say, “I was only kidding” (or whatever)
Not only is network security necessary to the long term good of ZEC, but so is community trust. Lose that and you never get it back. I can be argued easily that your words early on have the same effect as a promise, especially when, in a trust-less system, you ask early supporters for some of that trust.
I have an idea guys lets form a community GPU miner and wait till z9 comes to the market as soon as it arrives we will point our rig to something else if there is no gpu miner transactions will confirm slow and people will lost interest on this coin because there is no miner and as i think most of the miner is trader so don’t buy ZEC ultimately this coin will lose interest and all those Z9 will be waste because they need to take back there ROI soon and if it continues for 3-4 months all ASIC miners will be gone, correct me if i am wrong
I agree. Also, to your point. Remember, there are long term consequences when a singular company and Country provide a majority of the blockchain power. You lose decentralization and give it to the Manufacturing Company (Bitmain), which is based in Communist China.
What bigger threat is there? The networks will be owned by China and they will have leverage to control everything. Its just a matter of time and they are patient enough to finally take the power, from the world.
Just think. China has done many bans over the last year, regarding cryptocurrencies. But they never said anything about mining. They are smart, we cannot allow them to win. The blockchain must be for everyone, not 1 company, and 1 Country.
Fork ZCASH!
Correction, if you, “Can’t see the imminent and long term threat…”
End the thread here.
I still support the friendly - fork if asic-resistance is what is voted,
I think after the split and forward spending time limit, allowing the oldZcash chain minable block rewards for another 6mo or so, just keep it mining allowing people who get left behind the possibility to trade it or whatever, then after the rewards stop theyre left with a dead Zk-snarks capable messanger currency which they node and asic mine for their transaction fees between themselves (or chain depreciation I guess but they did build that little thing ya know, let them decide when to throw it away)
There’s a reason ZCash had the Dev fee that everyone was annoyed about…causing forks like Zclassic and Zen. The people behind Zcash (there are people behind every coin)…these people, are motivated by profit. Nothing wrong with that.
But when you sell out your core values (ASIC resistance) because you see higher profits, then you have low character and low integrity. The Zcash team had a responsibility to the community that got them to where they are at present. The fact that they are even considering not forking or not resisting ASICs illustrates their character and values.
To say they owe it to the miners that put them in the position they are in to fix the threat caused by ASICs is an understatement. It is their duty. But I think the writing is on the wall.
I have lost faith in Zcash and the development team that they are debating to fork or not and are not protecting the network. It appears they are are just a bunch of programmers (there have been signs i.e. no default wallet; things don’t happen in this world unless you push it) and don’t have the vision to be the leader in next generation of Crypto currencies **or it is a scam to cash out founders reward. ** People don’t trust Zcash again or their parameter generation ceremony no mater what the say from now on even if they fork the team is not upto task, there should be new leadership or council.
For those of you that think that ASIC means the end of decentralization and at the same time you have your GPU rigs pointing to Flypool, there is one simple work that describes your point of view - hypocrisy.
And those of us who mine on another pool like Nano Pool or Dwarf Pool…what are we then? Maybe there is a lot of Bitmain Z9 hash power on Flypool? Who is to say unless they do as Monero did, and kill the ASIC…then it became REALLY apparently what the deal was.
Oh, I would love if that were true, but Sapling is a very complex piece of cryptographic engineering. We’ve been working on it for well over a year at this point (and on the designs of various components of it since before we even launched the Zcash network / Zcash Sprout). Here are the blog posts that outline the various moving pieces:
Have to agree. You can’t make speculation on how long it should take unless your elbows deep in the development yourself. It’s easy to arm chair rule on it. Full Disclosure: I also have a CS BS in C, C++ among other things.
If they cared about ethics, they would keep to their word and not backpedal, change previously written statements, dodge direct questions or stall.
Cryptomined summed it up pretty well I think. Along with documenting post changes after Zooko made his 3rd April post.
It was stated. Repeatedly. Honor it.
Well, right now ZCash community has bigger problem needs to be solved, than transactions speed. But we didnt see ZcashCo position on that matter