Will there be fewer miners? Maybe. Is there a risk in potential centralization? Sure.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't though. If ASICMiner turns out to be real (the closest one to being real ATM), they could easily overwhelm the network with a fairly low-tech low-cost project. I believe they stated specs along the lines of $200k for their development and creation of ASICs. If you can realistically and demonstrably overwhelm the entire network for a quarter of a Mil, I'd say that certainly presents a graver danger than the potential for fewer hands in the cookie jar.
Topic: Risk of ASIC proliferation - page 2. (Read 3678 times)
As the ASIC miners start mining, and "outdated" miners go offline, does this not pose a risk to the network in the sense that there are fewer overall miners?
The network as it stands now is far more distributed amongst a greater number of computers & hardware mining. If the majority of these go offline due to obsolescence, in essence there would be a centralization of power to a far fewer number of miners.
Although the network hash rate will be significantly higher, the number of people involved will greatly reduce. Does anyone see a risk in this? Perhaps if the ASICs develop hardware issues in the future (I hope not) and cease mining operations, I would think the network would be very vulnerable to an attack. Granted, difficulty would drop and "regular" miners would return in a balancing act.
Is the efficiency and hash rate increase worth the trade off of a less distributed mining network?
The network as it stands now is far more distributed amongst a greater number of computers & hardware mining. If the majority of these go offline due to obsolescence, in essence there would be a centralization of power to a far fewer number of miners.
Although the network hash rate will be significantly higher, the number of people involved will greatly reduce. Does anyone see a risk in this? Perhaps if the ASICs develop hardware issues in the future (I hope not) and cease mining operations, I would think the network would be very vulnerable to an attack. Granted, difficulty would drop and "regular" miners would return in a balancing act.
Is the efficiency and hash rate increase worth the trade off of a less distributed mining network?
Jump to: