Asics don't cause centralization in Decred.
The decisions are taken by stake holders through POS mining tickets.
Decred found the solution to the btc governance problem
Yes the miners don't have the (voting)power to fork but that doesn't mean at all that
mining itself wont be centralized due to ASICs.
You have a serious misunderstanding of the matter.
I'd challenge that. Asics don't cause centralization of mining anymore than GPU-mined PoW chains. Pool mining is a
much larger cause of mining centralization than asics.
The only real difference between an asic and a gpu, is the asic costs more and can only be used for that 1 algo. The "offender" there is the higher cost of hardware. It's true, that will price some small miners out of the mining game (and thus, the argument of causing centralization). However, those exact same small-time miners are mining, guess where, with pools! They are not solo mining and adding to a decentralized network. Do you see how this counters the argument of "gpu == decentralization"?
You should go search for case studies on Ethereum vs Bitcoin mining centralization. I'm betting you'll learn a thing or two.
While large pools pose an issue, you seem to neglect the bigger picture and principals at hand.
The distribution, the issuance, the subsidy of the coin itself is what you should be concerned way first and foremost about.
I mean isn't that obvious to you? How come this even needs to be said ...
Do I really need to spell it out? The coin distribution itself will be more centralized which is one of the WORST things to happen to any coin which claims to operate in a fair and DEcentralized manner.
And you dare to challenge THAT?
Lol Ok, try to get off that high horse. We're adults (at least I am) having a discussion
Issuance and subsidy is agnostic to gpu vs asic mining topic (as long as difficulty adjustment works well). Concerning coin distribution: it's a downside. But again, I'd argue it doesn't outweigh the plethora of security benefits gained, at least imo (and the opinion of the devs
)
BTC makes a great case study. Despite the centralization of hash power (which we also see occurs with gpu algos), chain security is high, and the coin is obviously prospering. And that was "v1" of Asic coins! Take a look at LTC coin distribution compared to BTC. See the wider distribution among wallets? It's reasonable to say then, that DCR distribution will also be *at least as* good as BTC's, e.g. due to manufacturer lessons learned.
Let's not forget that PoW is only 1 way the chain is secured. That's
especially critical when considering the distribution problem. PoS through tickets is a low-barrier entry for "mining" DCR, meaning those individuals priced out of asics will be able to mine. The counter argument for that would be ticket price I suppose. 79 DCR ticket x $30/DCR = $2370 for one ticket right now. Luckily, DCR started with a larger distribution than most coins due to the airdrop
