Topic: Preventing Asic mining [fork] after next halving would solve a lot of problems. - page 3. (Read 3564 times)

All I am trying is to argue that asic mining is not a good thing for the community. Its neither trolling or ridiculous. If there is any chance to get back into CPU / GPU mining it would do things better.

Thanks for the link andytoshi

Seems like they have at least the same understanding about the words I was using before and not like the ignorant guy DannyHamilton.

Sigh, ASIC hardness has been discussed ad nauseum. It is neither possible nor desirable.

Actually, that is exactly how bitcoin was designed.  Satoshi said so himself.


Clearly.


It's possible, but given your ability to understand anything you've commented on so far, I doubt it.


POW is currently the best known solution to the byzantine generals problem.  If you have a better solution, let me know.


Sorry. I thought you used the word "monopolism" (which is a noun meaning the existence or prevalence of monopolies), not "monopolize" (which is a verb that can either describe the act of maintaining a monopoly OR can describe the act of excluding others).

A monolopy is the exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade.

Regardless, in general use (at least in the English language here in the U.S.), a monopoly is when a SINGLE entity is in control of an overwhelming majority of something.  If you have two or more entities, that is not a monopoly.  That is healthy competition between multiple entities, and is how capitalism generally operates.  Even within capitalism, monopolies can occur. Without regulation, as long as the monopoly supplies a desired product or service at an acceptable price, the monopoly can continue to exist indefinitely.  If the monopoly attempts to use their control of the market to provide reduced value at an increased price, then they open themselves up to competition from others.  If you don't like the idea of free market forces controlling the system and you prefer some sort of regulation to prevent consolidation of mining, then you aren't going to like Bitcoin very much.


I'm doing the best to answer your questions, correct your mistakes, and point out that your trolling FUD is rather ridiculous.  The crap you are spewing here has been stated and debunked hundreds of times on this forum.  

Well AMDn NVIDIA Intel are not producing for cryptocoins only, better said they don´t even plan with buyers from this markets.
But asic manufactorer just produce for mining bitcoins. They will produce and mine theirself or sell to their best partners (selling more, buying high amounts, long term), this is how economic works.

What is so hard to understand that actually a small rate of asic holders are mining all amount of bitcoins, 2 years ago it were tausends of miners mining the amount of bitcoins. And 1000 of miners are unlikely selling all their bitcoins at once like its happening now.


Bitcoins are not designed for being mined from a small group of investors having the money and the power producing and generating the mayor part of bitcoins.


Well like I said i am not technic affine, but honestly I think I understand more about economics then you. If this is true then POW in this initial form is the problem.


mo·nop·o·lize  (m-np-lz)
tr.v. mo·nop·o·lized, mo·nop·o·liz·ing, mo·nop·o·liz·es
1. To acquire or maintain a monopoly of.
2. To dominate by excluding others: monopolized the conversation.

Why you are insulting me, you seems like having no clue about economics but acting like you know.

There are only 2 companies producing high-end GPUs (AMD, Nvidia) and only 2 companies producing high-end CPUs (Intel, AMD) in large volume. In theory, if cryptocurrency gains worldwide adoption, the potential for mining to become dominated by a single manufacturer is far larger with CPU or GPU mining than it is with ASIC mining.

The reason AMD didn't corner the mining market back when GPU mining was all the rage is that it simply wasn't worth the effort back then. Who knows what the future would've brought in an ASIC-less world?

My guess is that you confuse pools with miners and mining farms. Just because there are "only" 4-5 big pools, does not mean that all their hashing power belongs to them.



An ASIC is just a special purpise chip that does what a general purpose chip (CPU, GPU) does, but with higher energy efficiency and usually faster. There is no real way to prevent special hardware. There are litecoin (or better scrypt) ASICs. IMHO if a coin has no ASIC or GPU support yet its not because its not possible, but because its to expensive because the value per coin is not high enough.


What makes you think that its miners that sell coins atm? Why not those two brothers?



Again, assumptions, gueswork. Do you have at least signs that your claims are true?

Then perhaps you need to purchase a dictionary.


http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/consolidate


You are mistaken.  There are scrypt mining ASICs for litecoins.  The main reason that other altcoins don't yet have ASIC is that there isn't enough value in those scamcoins and crapcoins to make it worth the effort for someone to design an ASIC chip for them.


Dumping occurs when those holding bitcoins feel that they can get more value for their bitcoins by exchanging them now than they can by exchanging or using them later.  If there were 1000's more miners than there are, then you could have 1000's of people exchanging their bitcoins.


Again I think you need a dictionary.  I don't think you know what the word monopoly means.

Actually there are less miners then we had 1 year before. I don´t have exact stats but I am guessing that 4-5 big asic farming companys control the market while one year ago it was spread into 1000 of miners. This is centralization for me.


So when 4-5 big mining farms control the full hashing power this is for you consolidation. Consolidation means to do something solid or firm; solidify; strengthen: , this is the wikipedia translation of this word.


You could enable only script mining like litecoins, I am not affine with the developing structure behing that, but there are altcoins where you can´t asic mine.


This kind of dumping we have right now would never happend without asic mining, because without asic mining there were 1000 of miners sharing their mining earnings. Actually there are only some big farms who mine the mayor part of bitcoins and control the market. They can move the markets dramaticly.


This is not capitalism, this is monopolism. You have some companys create new asic hardware, this companys mine thereself or sell their main parts to just 4-5 big companys.

No, it wouldn't.


I don't think I'd call that "centralizing".  Perhaps you mean to say "consolidating"?


He certainly planned for consolidation of full nodes, and for the vast majority of users to run SPV clients.


I'm not sure how you think you are going to "prohibit" the creation and use of Application Specific Integrated Circuits, but I suspect that any method you think should be used either wouldn't work or would simply result in a less secure network.


I don't think you know what the phrase pump and dump means.  Perhaps you should take some time and do a little bit of learning before you try to make accusations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pump_and_dump


Yes, that is how capitalism and incentive works.  So long as there is a profit to be earned, there is an incentive to increase the amount of mining.  Mining will consolidate with those that have access to the cheapest resources since they can maintain a profit while all others are pushed out of the market.

Preventing Asic mining after next halving would solve a lot of problems.

Actually we are in a phase of centralising the bitcoin network, from individuals to companies belonging big asic farms.

Satoshi for sure never planned asic mining. 99% of the bitcoin community would benefit when asic mining is prohibited.

Without asic mining we would never have such a bump and dump scenario we have actually. Big asic farm holder selling their bitcoins to be able to pay the electrician and to cut out competition due low efficiency of mining.