Topic: [LTC] Changing the litecoin Proof of Work function to avoid ASIC mining? - page 3. (Read 33318 times)

People tend to forget history.

"May 21st, 2010,  Laszlo Hanyecz, a programmer living in Florida, sent 10,000 bitcoin (BTC), the online-only, open source cryptocurrency, to a volunteer in England, who then spent about $25 to order Hanyecz some Papa John's."

i voted yes, if you are currently mining with gpus and you are not mining vertcoin, you are doing yourself and all gpu owners a disservice and putting yourself out of business at the same time.

Vertcoin (VTC) is somehow similar to that

The best way to deter ASIC mining from gpu mining is to create competition among ASIC mining manufacturers.

One possible way is to create a new scrypt coin with much reduced N-factor (litecoin is 10?) and have hugh supply of coins in short time span-- like 500 billion in 1 year (dogecoin has 100 billion in 1.5 years) .

So everybody - even ppl without much computer knowledge - will be able to buy a $5 USB ASIC miner and start enjoying mining and owning some "new sparkling computer coin" !!

Correction: ASIC may result in many no longer supporting Litecoin. But that is merely speculative.
                         ----

  I am merely troubled what the end results could be. After more reflection I don't want to say asic mining of Litecoin will be it's ruin because clearly that is an unknown outcome that cannot be predicted.
In fact it may well be the best thing that ever happens to Litecoin. Only time will tell that outcome.


 My last thoughts on this topic:

 I am very dismayed and disillusioned after this poll here, and the poll taken in the Litecoin forum, both on this very topic, and that both polls results display that the clear majority desire for Litecoin to be shielded from asic mining going forward, if at all possible.

 Obviously many want asic mining going forward, and their in firm command and control.

 Okay, best of luck.

  As an investor, and miner too, I decided to already make a judgement call. I took profits a few days ago, and will point my miners elsewhere.

 Lastly; Those in firm command and control Litecoin have lost the confidence of the clear majority.


Caveat emptor

The voters spoke. But nobody listens? nor comprehends? Let alone acts?

 2014 is THE YEAR of Bitcoin. Not 2013.

 Huge things are in store for btc in 2014, and any others along for the ride, as long as their extremely well marketed and promoted. If not their merely part of the noise in the side show called the Crypto Exchanges.


 What will 2015 be? Widespread Bitcoin adoption. And whoever else has their act fully done rides along too.


 It's Winner('s) take All.

Do I need to remind the greater crypto communities that everyone hate's losers?


 The vast majority of the marketplace already has it's #1 winner.

 There are only so many runner up slot(s).

 And the point being that once one get's to that position it will be difficult to dethrone them just like it already is going to be most difficult to dethrone BTC. Only BTC is now in that position. No one else has even arrived to the party yet. And everyone else has yet to prove their even worthy of success.

 These Alt. coin runner up's (winners, if there are any more winners) must force themselves into the marketplace fast, before btc gains too much of a stranglehold on far too many, to make much market penetration possible. And they each must carve out their own territory, and greater acceptance in the mainstream.

 So far a few minor one's are much more impressive than any of the major runner up candidates in terms of their marketing, promotion, and real world applications. I wont bother to discuss the details, that should already be painfully obvious for anyone that has paid attention.

 Needless to say businesses and everyone else will not care to juggle many different crypto-currencies unless their uniquely targeting audiences for whatever reason(s). The one thing that made Litecoin special is already now missing! That can't stand, and then also hope it passes the test of wide spread review and acceptance. If Litecoin cannot defend itself from ASIC's, then what else can it not defend itself from is the very thing many will soon question.

 It was thought that the wonderful thing about Litecoin was that it is ASIC proof, and that it was THE Crypto for The MASSES. But then we find out it's not. That simply must be fixed without any further delays. Or Litecoin ends as fraudulent, and likely fails because it cannot live up to it's major claim to fame. Others already are asic proof, or so they merely claim? Yet the CPU only types are also botnet-coin specialty frauds.

 Maybe even adding PoS is possible as an alternative, I don't know. I have no idea. Just fix it. And KISS it. (Keep it simple stupid = kiss). And for certain don't screw it up while doing so. And get it correct, the 1st time. Do all that and suddenly the Litecoin development team are the new hero's in the greater Crypto-Currency Revolution that is about to take the world by storm. And doing that, plus strong promotions and ever stronger marketing will force Litecoin to be at least #2.

 Enough burning daylight. There's no time left to waste.


 2014 is the rush to get into the mainstream marketplace.
====================================

 So far LTC is barely treading water.

 ASICs will be the ruin of Litecoin. That's a no-brainer.

 Again, the community has voted, the votes are in, and no one is changing their own votes.

 There is absolutely no time to waste anymore. Please get it done now, without further delay, and get those promotions and marketing plans fully underway now too. Otherwise a stampede will out run, and out play what was to be at least #2.

do anything need to  avoid asic

They are available- look for 'Gridseed'. At the moment, the pricing is on the level of GPU cards, in terms of kHash/$. But this is price gouging, they can be manufatured a lot cheaper, and will flood the market, once production is ramped up.
Unfortunately, because I really like running my GPU rigs 

Not always.  For example, I don't see how you can compute this hash function without 32GiB of memory.

Are you sure that the existence of these scrypt ASIC is not a hoax? I've seen no FPGA scrypt implementation usable yet. And, having a FPGA is a first start to test and optimize a future ASIC.


In my opinion, having a fully specialized and efficient scrypt ASIC, interfaced with a high speed DDR5 memory (scrypt requires a lot of memory...) , and competitive with a R280X (4.3 billion transistors) will not be there tomorrow....

That's the main issue that a lot of people don't understand. That it takes money away from the miners, and gives it to not the people who bought the ASICs, but to the companies that creates them.

People really have to think about what everybody asks, which is if they can make more money with their ASICs, then why don't they just mine it themselves. They do mine, they just sell it to people just in time for them to not be as profitable, since they have no resale value.

Lets avoid the ASICs, we need to keep them away from us.  They are great for bitcoin and we are proud for that.  But we need scrypt to allude them.

I do have to say, ASICs indeed shift the profit from those doing the actual mining to those making the mining gear.

It is a bummer.  There is a lot of fun in designing, deploying, and maintaining a large GPU farm.  I will be sad when ASICs obliterate that niche. 

ASIC machines did not contribute anything, just taking $$$ out of minerts and put them in BFL-AVALON-KNC like companies.

Introducing ASIC to the scene would be same like cheating in the games, you will reach better score easily, but the game would become non-playable for a lot of ppl. Like when there is a cheater in CounterStrike pool and there are no admins, soon will be plenty of them, and the charm of gaming is spoiled by retard.

GPU mining needs to die away slowly. Bring on the ASICs..

once these ASICs come out, they're going directly to the profit-switching pools like multipool/middlecoin.

so glad Quark doesnt have this problem ... it looks better and better all the time

Although the votes are skewed towards yes, I'm glad a significant amount of talk is for not changing it.

As mentioned earlier, doing so would lead to a slippery slope; and is just a means of delaying an "inevitability." The issue is that the premise was already shaky from the start; in such a burgeoning and young area (in technology, no less) a sweeping statement saying that a protocol would be ASIC-Proof was a stretch in itself. And the trickiest thing is how to ensure that the protocol remains ASIC-Proof. If we change it once, and then realize that we were wrong, we'll have to do it again. And again. And again...

I think that the implications of changing are far greater, and more far reaching than leaving it as is. How people react to it is another story (for all we know it could bolster the value of the network), but is it worth the "risk?" It would be much simpler changing the mission statement of LTC in my opinion. Once again though, the reaction to this type of change is unknown. Plus you lose the main "differentiating" feature of LTC. But for me, that is much more worth the "risk" than changing the protocol (and possibly changing it again and again).

I think the loss in credibility of possibly having to change a protocol multiple times far outweighs the credibility loss in changing a relatively young mission statement.

There will pretty much always be a time-memory tradeoff, because you can always avoid using memory by recomputing the data when you need it...

Litecoin was designed to be ASIC proof. Even GPU proof, but that did not work out either. ASIC is definitely not the back bone of Litecoin yet. But changing the PoW function is hazardous, certainly. Still, I vote for it. Because Litecoin will lose one of its distinguishing features if it becomes dominated by the ASIC miners.

I did.