If sufficient number of bitcoiners start running graphic cards in support of etc-eth (and they/we probably do this kind of thing already judging by some here), what may stop developers to release a "GPU only"-fork for bitcoin?
This is basically a sword of Damocles that they have over Chinese miner farms and pools.
People will switch their gear from etc-eth to btc if ASICs are ruled out, I think.
It probably would be the best, anyway.
I don't think it is possible to prevent ASICs from ever being used to mine. LTC was suppose to be mined by not ASICs however after a while, companies invested in R&D necessary to manufacture ASICs because there would be enough demand because the value of LTC was high enough.
I think the same would probably happen if the mining algo were to change for Bitcoin.
it would set the asic builders backwards for a long time.
If you added a dag file over 4gb it would force you to have 8gb gpus. That would mean costly development for asic builders.
Better yet if you made it that 2x 8gb cards in crossfire would be the next change after 1x 8gb gpu card was the first change as soon as the the new asic came out switch to the 2 x 8gb algo so the entire time spent building an asic to mine the 'new' btc would have been wasted.
I am pretty much ready for an attack against asic building companies. I have a lot invested in s-9's but frankly if they were rendered useless for btc I switch them over to another 256 coin. I got back a decent amount already from my s-9's
BTC has a lot of real problems at this time. I don't like the asic lock on the coin. As I see it harming expansion of BTC.
As interesting and appealing as this sounds, changing Bitcoin's proof of work algorithm seems pretty unlikely. That change is far more contentious than the other contemplated changes, like block size expansion.
If the PoW were to change, ASIC companies and the miners that have invested in them would resist it. There would be two Bitcoins, like Eth/Etc today. The original SHA256 algorithm would be much more secure because they would have way more hash power. That would only change if an overwhelming number of people adopt the new algorithm.
If the new PoW algorithm caught on, then the ASIC manufacturers would move to support it. I don't believe it's possible to create an algorithm that cannot be implemented more efficiently in hardware. If there's enough financial incentive, ASICs designers will find a way.
Basically this would be a replay of SHA256 with the only effect of a reset for a few years. But in the end there would still be two Bitcoin chains, end-user confusion, merchant adoption would be hampered, and there would probably be less investment from VC's because the double chain mess would make Bitcoin investment even more risky. Bitcoin's first mover network effect advantage might even be lost to an alt.
I don't see this happening at all. There's too much at stake for the current Bitcoin movers and shakers to allow this.
Instead there will always be alts, like Eth/Etc, some of which will be profitable enough to draw miners away.
