Change Bitcoin SHA-256 to SCRYPT - page 2.

Jazkal

sr. member

Activity: 319

Merit: 250

Quote from: frankenmint on July 12, 2013, 05:45:42 AM

Jazkal= pissed off from the fact that he's 3 years late. I think myself and everyone else who bought into asics hardware would be up in arms if that happens.

I'm sorry you didn't take the time to read.

As I stated above, I've been in the game since 2011, don't see how that is "3 years late". And if you had read, you would see I have invested into ASICs, so I am not just a GPU farmer, I have the greater good of Bitcoin in mind for these discussions, not just some stick in the mud that is upset the tech has gotten ahead of him.

jimbobway

legendary

Activity: 1304

Merit: 1014

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on July 12, 2013, 01:04:30 AM

Quote from: jimbobway on July 12, 2013, 01:02:53 AM

A security researcher has predicted SHA 256 will be cracked this year. When that happens the algorithm may change.

Cite? There are not even any "academic attacks" against SHA-2 at this time. An academic attacking being a method which is faster than brute force but still computationally infeasible to exploit in the real world.

https://mobile.twitter.com/jgarzik/status/336218499938668544

happygeorge

full member

Activity: 146

Merit: 100

In da Jungle!

Quote from: frankenmint on July 12, 2013, 05:45:42 AM

Quote from: Jazkal on July 11, 2013, 01:43:53 PM

What would it take to get the algo changed from SHA-256 to Scrypt?

Jazkal= pissed off from the fact that he's 3 years late. I think myself and everyone else who bought into asics hardware would be up in arms if that happens. Likely BTC falls out of prominence and PPC becomes the Reining Champ - thus keeping the sha256 dominance maintained. If you can't read into that there was bits of sarcasm peppered into the statement above.

I think people's investment into GPU mining is still an order of magnitude higher... although, as far as I know Scrypt is GPU unfriendly, so who the heck knows!

Maybe some new G-scrypt will be invented Wink

happygeorge

full member

Activity: 146

Merit: 100

In da Jungle!

Quote from: Jazkal on July 11, 2013, 02:05:55 PM

I think Let's Talk Bitcoin covered the issue pretty well in Episodes 21 and 22. I've had the same beliefs for some time, and with the way the ASIC world is going, it is playing out. If the community doesn't step up and make the change, or at least have an open discussion on the issue, I see Bitcoin dead in less than a year.

I am following not only these threads, but also this bet:

http://betsofbitco.in/item?id=1432

I'm betting you are right... in the sense that there will be a change sometime before the end of the year.

frankenmint

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1018

HoneybadgerOfMoney.com Weed4bitcoin.com

Quote from: Jazkal on July 11, 2013, 01:43:53 PM

What would it take to get the algo changed from SHA-256 to Scrypt?

Jazkal= pissed off from the fact that he's 3 years late. I think myself and everyone else who bought into asics hardware would be up in arms if that happens. Likely BTC falls out of prominence and PPC becomes the Reining Champ - thus keeping the sha256 dominance maintained. If you can't read into that there was bits of sarcasm peppered into the statement above.

arnuschky

hero member

Activity: 517

Merit: 501

I don't see the point of all the people that complain about Bitcoin mining on SHA-256 is overspecialized etc. I think it's actually a necessary requirement for stability.

Just imagine that we would change to hash function X (be it SCRYPT or whatever). Immediately, the arms race would start again from the beginning, just as we see it with Litecoin now. People would develop GPU miners, then FPGA, then ASICs. It does not make sense to re-start this arms race every time, because it bring a lot of insecurity and instability to the currency.

In the end, a currency that does not has reached the ASIC-stage yet always runs the risk of someone developing an ASIC and using it to get control over the network. With Bitcoin, we're close to the end of development. There are ASICs, but they are spread out among many entities, vendors and miners. There is progression, but we're getting close to the end of playing catch-up with the rest of the technological development of chips: we're close to the end, and the advancement of mining speeds will slow down. It's a really good thing that we've got to ASICs already. No surprises.

Zangelbert Bingledack

legendary

Activity: 1036

Merit: 1000

Before the Internet, experts were experts. You usually only ever heard a security expert talk about security, an economist talk about economics, or a physicist talk about physics.

Now experts still get audience, same as before, but they can talk about anything. Yet we still have the impression that experts are always reliable, since back when they only spoke about things in their field they generally were. The result is they make a lot more mistakes, and sometimes people get misguided because they trusted the expert.

This is most apparent when non-economists who have no understanding of economics speak on a subject that, unbeknownst to them, actually requires a solid understanding of economics.

jl2012

legendary

Activity: 1792

Merit: 1087

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on July 12, 2013, 01:04:30 AM

Quote from: jimbobway on July 12, 2013, 01:02:53 AM

A security researcher has predicted SHA 256 will be cracked this year. When that happens the algorithm may change.

Cite? There are not even any "academic attacks" against SHA-2 at this time. An academic attacking being a method which is faster than brute force but still computationally infeasible to exploit in the real world.

Just nonsense. The blockchain is still safe even it uses MD5(MD5()). The difficulty will adjust.

Actually, a weakened SHA256 gives advantage to GPU mining because ASICs are not programmable.

hashman

legendary

Activity: 1264

Merit: 1008

Quick question:

Why is taking hashing power away from botnet operators and putting it in the hands of hardware owners a bad thing?

stdset

hero member

Activity: 572

Merit: 506

It is srypt altcoins, who should worry, that somebody privately develops a scrypt asic and shuts them all down.

Jazkal

sr. member

Activity: 319

Merit: 250

Quote from: jimbobway on July 12, 2013, 01:02:53 AM

A security researcher has predicted SHA 256 will be cracked this year. When that happens the algorithm may change.

So, If that should happen, someone could attack the block chain, and possibly mine the entire rest of the chain in a matter of days\weeks? Yeah, if that is the case, that would force a hard fork.

🏰 TradeFortress 🏰

vip

Activity: 1316

Merit: 1043

👻

Quote from: jimbobway on July 12, 2013, 01:02:53 AM

A security researcher has predicted SHA 256 will be cracked this year. When that happens the algorithm may change.

Can I bet on that?

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: jimbobway on July 12, 2013, 01:02:53 AM

A security researcher has predicted SHA 256 will be cracked this year. When that happens the algorithm may change.

Cite? There are not even any "academic attacks" against SHA-2 at this time. An academic attacking being a method which is faster than brute force but still computationally infeasible to exploit in the real world.

jimbobway

legendary

Activity: 1304

Merit: 1014

A security researcher has predicted SHA 256 will be cracked this year. When that happens the algorithm may change.

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: cypherdoc on July 11, 2013, 04:48:14 PM

Quote from: Jazkal on July 11, 2013, 02:05:55 PM

I think Let's Talk Bitcoin covered the issue pretty well in Episodes 21 and 22. I've had the same beliefs for some time, and with the way the ASIC world is going, it is playing out. If the community doesn't step up and make the change, or at least have an open discussion on the issue, I see Bitcoin dead in less than a year.

Andreas is grossly wrong on this one.

+1 Also didn't like the misquoting of Satoshi (or technically the Bitcoin paper).

Also the whole idea of some miners having "4, 5 magnitudes of efficiency over other miners" is just silly. It won't happen. If someone is that inefficient the competitive market means they simply will not mine. They will use competitive hardware or they won't mine. Competitive doesn't necessarily mean the absolute best. If someone releases a 40nm ASIC it doesn't obsolete all other ASICSs. Sure their resale value goes down, they are less competitive, they spend more per BTC on energy but they can still compete. A 1 or 2 level process improvement (i.e. 110nm vs 85 vs 60 nm) doesn't produce a magnitude improvement. In theory a 2x improvement in electrical efficiency and maybe a 1.5x improvement in capital efficiency however real world often falls short (even by major players like Intel and AMD).

So the question comes looking forward 18-24 months will ASICs be widely available from multiple sources competing in an open free market? Nothing I have seen indicates it won't. So instead of debating buying used AMD 5000 series cards vs the new HD 7970 it will be "should I buy this used BFL SC Single" or spend more on this next gen ASIC Miner board.

Can someone please articulate an argument that in 18-24 months there won't be multiple ASICs, reasonably available from multiple vendors.

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: gmaxwell on July 11, 2013, 04:33:06 PM

Quote from: Remember remember the 5th of November on July 11, 2013, 01:48:42 PM

51% of the network in agreement pretty much.

uh. "51%" has nothing to do with anything here.

This I wish this myth would just die.

You can fork Bitcoin easily. Clone the github, make an incompatible change and publish it. Assuming you have at least one node mining TADA you have forked Bitcoin. You can do it with 1% of the hashing power or 99%. In either case two incompatible forks will exist. Technically there would be two different "Bitcoins". "Will the real Bitcoin please stand up?"

Now convincing people to use your fork over the original... well that is the tough problem. It is a societal problem not a technological one. So for the OP example one could make a scrypt fork in probably less than a day. Now how are you going to convince people to use it?

Jazkal

sr. member

Activity: 319

Merit: 250

Quote from: skull88 on July 12, 2013, 12:25:14 AM

I think changing the algo would hurt it worser than the ASICs will (which won't hurt it imo). Undecided

Like someone mentioned already, if you want scrypt because you think Bitcoin will die due the ASIC's, get Litecoins.

I have. My GPU farm is pointed at Litecoin. I also have ASICs on order. But Bitcoin is my first love, and I hate to see it slowly commit suicide.

skull88

hero member

Activity: 683

Merit: 500

I think changing the algo would hurt it worser than the ASICs will (which won't hurt it imo). Undecided

Like someone mentioned already, if you want scrypt because you think Bitcoin will die due the ASIC's, get Litecoins.

polarhei

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

Firing it up

Big project like this, not possible to modify method at the later stage. Also there is not only one

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

Quote from: casascius on July 11, 2013, 01:55:06 PM

Quote from: malevolent on July 11, 2013, 01:51:50 PM

Quote from: Jazkal on July 11, 2013, 01:43:53 PM

What would it take to get the algo changed from SHA-256 to Scrypt?

Pretty much impossible in the foreseeable future with all the investments in single-purpose (SHA) ASICs.

Unless someone wealthy or an organization with a lot of resources manages to do a 51% attack (or simply become the most dominant mining entity) with their own in-house ASIC production, in which case a switch to scrypt could happen overnight.

The reason I say this is I consider it somewhat possible: as budget goes up linearly in an ASIC production enterprise, the output and efficiency goes up something more exponentially. A big whale could do it, the way I see it.

i seriously doubt it. they'd have to compete with Avalons chip shipments and they have made a conscious decision to disseminate them widely. plus, Avalon makes more money doing it this way.

Topic: Change Bitcoin SHA-256 to SCRYPT - page 2. (Read 5862 times)