- The backup algorithms would only be useful in a scenario where SHA256 is not itself broken, but a single miner with the "cannot easily change algorithm" weakness is doing something harmful (such as forcing the network to trust them).
Topic: Possible impacts of ASIC mining and hypothetical scenarios - page 2. (Read 3442 times)
- The backup algorithms would only be useful in a scenario where SHA256 is not itself broken, but a single miner with the "cannot easily change algorithm" weakness is doing something harmful (such as forcing the network to trust them).
Ok, I think I get it now. I just wasted my time with this whole discussion. Everyone pretty much agrees, even Luke-Jr - but he can't stop there but goes on meaningless and confused tangents. I'm out of here.
- The backup algorithms would only be useful in a scenario where SHA256 is not itself broken, but a single miner with the "cannot easily change algorithm" weakness is doing something harmful (such as forcing the network to trust them).
- The backup algorithms would only be useful in a scenario where SHA256 is not itself broken, but a single miner with the "cannot easily change algorithm" weakness is doing something harmful (such as forcing the network to trust them).
Then it should not be a variation, but a completely different hashing function.
As I said
...
Yes that is the risk with using ASIC hardware - if sha256 is broken, then it will need to be replaced and all ASIC hardware at the time will become useless.
Damn shame about that hey.
The only reasonable solution to this would be to plan ahead for the failure of sha256 and decide in advance what will be used after sha256 fails.
The word 'secret' doesn't come in there in any way for any reason at all.
That solution, however, would require foresight and planning by the bitcoin devs ... which is not readily apparent in most of what they do ... and is completely missing in most of what you do Luke-jr.
...
Yes that is the risk with using ASIC hardware - if sha256 is broken, then it will need to be replaced and all ASIC hardware at the time will become useless.
Damn shame about that hey.
The only reasonable solution to this would be to plan ahead for the failure of sha256 and decide in advance what will be used after sha256 fails.
The word 'secret' doesn't come in there in any way for any reason at all.
That solution, however, would require foresight and planning by the bitcoin devs ... which is not readily apparent in most of what they do ... and is completely missing in most of what you do Luke-jr.
...
...
Bitcoin protocol changes require support from the economic majority, not the miner majority. That is, hashrates are irrelevant and the only thing that matters is "who people want to pay".
...
No. it requires both.Bitcoin protocol changes require support from the economic majority, not the miner majority. That is, hashrates are irrelevant and the only thing that matters is "who people want to pay".
...
Yes if no one uses bitcoin, then there will be little future for it.
However, if the blockchain doesn't get securely verified - no one can use it
- The backup algorithms would only be useful in a scenario where SHA256 is not itself broken, but a single miner with the "cannot easily change algorithm" weakness is doing something harmful (such as forcing the network to trust them).
Then it should not be a variation, but a completely different hashing function.
The thinking goes that if the algorythm needed to be changed to one that ASICs cant use and they are the majority of the network then they could vote not to change the algo simply be owning the majority of the hashing power.
We would get stuck on a broken/substandard algo because of it.
We would get stuck on a broken/substandard algo because of it.
- There is not (AFAIK) any reasonable excuse to lock out ASICs in general.
- Bitcoin protocol changes require support from the economic majority, not the miner majority. That is, hashrates are irrelevant and the only thing that matters is "who people want to pay".
- The backup algorithms would only be useful in a scenario where SHA256 is not itself broken, but a single miner with the "cannot easily change algorithm" weakness is doing something harmful (such as forcing the network to trust them).
* No, I don't know anything about BitVOIP or anything like that. I just quickly peeked at the Trade wiki page for a quick example I'm not biased on.
- The backup algorithms would only be useful in a scenario where SHA256 is not itself broken, but a single miner with the "cannot easily change algorithm" weakness is doing something harmful (such as forcing the network to trust them).
- Bitcoin protocol changes require support from the economic majority, not the miner majority. That is, hashrates are irrelevant and the only thing that matters is "who people want to pay".
- The backup algorithms would only be useful in a scenario where SHA256 is not itself broken, but a single miner with the "cannot easily change algorithm" weakness is doing something harmful (such as forcing the network to trust them).
The thinking goes that if the algorythm needed to be changed to one that ASICs cant use and they are the majority of the network then they could vote not to change the algo simply be owning the majority of the hashing power.
We would get stuck on a broken/substandard algo because of it.
We would get stuck on a broken/substandard algo because of it.
- There is not (AFAIK) any reasonable excuse to lock out ASICs in general.
- Bitcoin protocol changes require support from the economic majority, not the miner majority. That is, hashrates are irrelevant and the only thing that matters is "who people want to pay".
- The backup algorithms would only be useful in a scenario where SHA256 is not itself broken, but a single miner with the "cannot easily change algorithm" weakness is doing something harmful (such as forcing the network to trust them).
What does "who people want to pay" mean. Can you define or explain this statement specifically?
The thinking goes that if the algorythm needed to be changed to one that ASICs cant use and they are the majority of the network then they could vote not to change the algo simply be owning the majority of the hashing power.
We would get stuck on a broken/substandard algo because of it.
We would get stuck on a broken/substandard algo because of it.
- There is not (AFAIK) any reasonable excuse to lock out ASICs in general.
- Bitcoin protocol changes require support from the economic majority, not the miner majority. That is, hashrates are irrelevant and the only thing that matters is "who people want to pay".
- The backup algorithms would only be useful in a scenario where SHA256 is not itself broken, but a single miner with the "cannot easily change algorithm" weakness is doing something harmful (such as forcing the network to trust them).
The thinking goes that if the algorythm needed to be changed to one that ASICs cant use and they are the majority of the network then they could vote not to change the algo simply be owning the majority of the hashing power.
We would get stuck on a broken/substandard algo because of it.
We would get stuck on a broken/substandard algo because of it.
Since consumer ASICs would be online the new algorithm(s) first (as in, immediately), it won't be so simple to 51% attack at that point. If you could, however, I'm not sure any way for Bitcoin to ever really recover - any reason to justify switching to new algorithm(s) is extreme enough that it would never make sense to switch back by force.
I don't understand all the fuss about "secret" backup hashing algorithms (in the ASICMINER thread), and I don't see a problem with implementing a backup algorithm in hard-wired miners (ASICs). For years we've been mining with configurable hardware (CPUs, GPUs, FPGAs) that has practically infinite number of secret algorithms "embedded" - simply reprogramming the devices to a hashing algo of your choice would do. Why is the thought of hard-wired backup hashing algorithm in ASICs so scary?
This thread is a spin-off from:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1154935
Please use it to discuss the implications of the emerging field of ASIC mining and the role of ASIC hardware companies. Mentioned topics are interest of conflict between using the chips and selling them, secret algorithms and back-doors.
Enjoy!
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1154935
Please use it to discuss the implications of the emerging field of ASIC mining and the role of ASIC hardware companies. Mentioned topics are interest of conflict between using the chips and selling them, secret algorithms and back-doors.
Enjoy!
Jump to: