Topic: What exactly is the point of everyone's hatred of ASIC's? - page 3. (Read 5319 times)

we do need the fastest hardware available to protect the network, if btc network still ran on cpus. and one gouverment started to develop an asic on their own in secret, 5 antminers probably where enough to kill the network. i dont think the cpu hashrate would be much higher then a terrahash.

if you want to that now you need much more then a few smart people and a few bucks to design an asic that is capable of taking over the network.

if you buy overpriced 290x cards for 900 dollars a pop, you wont roi, true.
i build a new rig with 12 7950`s over christmas, i think 5 of them i bought where used, the rest brand new, also the cpus and ram where used as well.. in terms of btc it has allready has made roi.
i got the btc back that i put in allready. its just gravy from now on. and because difficulty doesn`t move insanely fast, it wil bring goed money for at least 6 months. maybe a year, and than ik can probably sell everything off for maybe 25% of what i payd for it. the rig wil pay for itself at least 3 times. probably more like 5 times.
you just have to be smart about it.

good luck doing that with a 10k neptune.

A point was made earlier in the thread that I wish to dispute. Somewhat.

I don't recall which of you said it, but what was said was that ASIC chips are relatively cheap to produce and sold at an absolute premium. So far, so good. But then the point was made that anyone developing ASICs would be insane to not follow that paradigm.

This is what I would dispute. The opportunity exists right now for someone who has the resources to follow a rather different model, and it's not only not insane, it would generate them more business than they could handle AND more goodwill than any other manufacturer.

That model is this:

Make a small batch that's expensive enough to cover NRE and a rather large chip run. Use the profits from that batch to build a huge amount of machines, and sell them just over cost. The profits per machine would be minimal, but selling IN HAND at low cost would gather up so freakin' many sales that said manufacturer would probably have to expand their operation to keep up with demand.

Now if you believe that Bitcoin is a passing fancy, this model will not appeal. If you're only in it for the short run, it won't appeal. If you want to be top dog when the dust settles, it will have a great deal of appeal.

This is the way I would do it. I am crazy, but I'm not insane. I understand the consequences and morals of my actions. (reference M'Naughton, the legal standard for insanity at common law). The only thing stopping me is lack of funds, as with money I could hire the experts.

Personally, I love ASICs. They're making the network so strong that mainstream adoption of bitcoin is within reach, as even the true paranoid can do the calculations and figure out that the network can't be easily broken. Would it have gotten there without the ASIC revolution? Probably, but it wouldn't be there now.

This same "arms race" happened with PC's. In the long run it was a good thing, as you can now go to Walmart, plop down 400 dollars, and have what was defined as a supercomputer when I was a pup.

Are you on the grass this evening sir?  Since ASICs are already developed, the "malicious entity" with money to burn that you talk about, would simply go and buy a bunch of ASIC to accomplish the 51% attack.  They could also do the same thing with GPUs, thus, it is neither a positive or negative to either argument.

I would argue though, that a worldwide network secured by both GPU and CPU would be the hardest to attack.  Take a coin like Darkcoin for instance.  I believe GPU and CPU will live together on this coin somewhat, and CPU won't be entirely crowded out.  If Darkcoin fails in this regard, you can always design a coin strictly for this purpose, and leverage memory requirements + hashing functions high enough that GPU always has the advantage, but CPU miners will still be around in high enough numbers.

The obvious solution to all these problems is to just have more than one block chain, with vastly different hashing functions and memory requirements for all of them.  Obviously toss some Proof of Stake systems into the mix too.  Wait...that's what we already have now...it only upsets people that are highly invested in Bitcoin...so they call anything that isn't Bitcoin a trash coin.

We don't need 200 coins to exist, but we do need at least 10 with highly different attributes.  I figure many proof of stake coins will also survive as virtual bank accounts.  I think PPC will definitely be dethroned as top PoS coin.  Cashcoin in particular has a better economic model.

Wrong. The answer is that an ASIC protected network prevents malicious entities from building ASIC devices and 51% attacking a network protected solely by CPU/GPU.

As long as there is a financial motivation to build faster hardware, faster hardware will be built. Attempting to call a truce at CPU levels or GPU levels is foolhardy at best. Someone will always look for an advantage to exploit until we hit the limits of technology.

I don't get those people who complain that ASICs won't ROI, and then they go ahead and build giant GPU farms that won't profit unless they can count on reselling their used hardware on eBay for >75% cost after 1 year.

Not comparable when people already owned CPUs and GPUs before Bitcoin existed.  This is probably also a rational motive for decreasing block rewards, to make that widespread hardware at the time actually matter, regardless of what happens in the future.

It depends on the vision of the creator as well.  Do you think the BTC creator would invent something and purposely restrict it's market penetration to as little as possible, thus making it fail as a currency?  Only thing saving BTC at the moment and giving it any market penetration whatsoever is the alt coin industry.  It would not reach enough hands to have a critical mass of liquidity otherwise.  We currently have CPU and GPU mining by proxy, and more people interested in it than ASIC as well.

There's a reason why you would never see a site like Amazon take NXT, at least for the next hundred years.  If they did, one of the thirty owners of NXT just wanders onto the page, blows all his NXT, and buys the entire site?  Now it's Amazon's job to sell people NXT by default?  Market penetration matters.

once asics are produced using current (like haswell equilivent) technology, the market will settle down.  and that moment is not that far off anymore.
once there is nothing left to copy and asic manufacturers actually have to start developing new chip manufacturing proceses to move performance forward asics will be abundend and wil be sold at normal profit margins. not for over 2000% profit as it is now.

with gpu and cpu you just changing from one middleman to another. amd is also just a middleman.

asics do have advantages. why buy an entire computer thats build to do a million things good enough just to mine.
shed all things you dont need and optimize it for a single task. makes it more eficient and a lot cheaper.

thats what asics do. thats why the whole world uses asics instead of pc`s, and for far more important things then bitcoin mining

i can buy a motorhome to go to the shop at the corner to buy a bottle of milk. that way i`m sure i got something thats up to any task i can encounter on the way. but is it really necesary and actually the best way to do it?

this is also true, for bitcoin to really take off people have to use it every day. buy busticket. popcorn at the movies, coffe at starbucks with the bitcoin wallet on you phone.

if everybody holds all their bitcoins. why would it have any value?
i have a bucket of sand, if we all hold our bucket of sand and think it is special, maybe we can convince others to think its special to. even though you cant use it for anything

It's also basic economics to BYPASS THE MIDDLEMAN (ASIC seller), and use GPU or CPU algorithms for coins.

There's no reason to like ASICs unless you enjoy being screwed by middlemen.

i have a different take on things. the bitcoin landscape is the way it is for multiple reasons but most importantly a shortage of asic miners to furfill demand. once this evens out the bitcoin mining  scene will be the same as the scrypt scene is now.

its basic economics.

in the near future you are able to buy new bitcoin asics at best buy at normal prices, allong with your tablet and laptop.

Original poster asked an invalid question.  The valid question is:

"What benefit does ASIC bring over CPU/GPU?"

The answer is none.

There's no energy consumption benefit.  Corporations simply upscale their hardware size, using the same amount of power, until all inventory on the entire internet is out of stock.

ASIC brings no benefits, problems too numerous to list, and also severely reduces market penetration.  

A currency with no market penetration has no liquidity.  With no liquidity, it's not a currency.

Why do you think Dogecoin has more daily transactions than Bitcoin?  Market penetration.

and what he said
You cant compete with the "big guys" with the "big money"
In the end bitcoin "possibly" will become the very thing it was meant to fight against.
"They" will control what happens to your money when it serves their interest at the time.

I do understand your point on this matter. What I really mean to point out was that with POW coins the energy levels required are just going to increase more and more, and there are more and more of these type of coins popping up all the time which is just adding to the power load. There are far more energy efficient coins out there that use things such as POS and their future hybrids/improvements. Although in there infancy they could lessen the power drain once developed further.
I do understand your point though on the processing power drain fiat causes.
Just a thought though, I am not an expert ( obviously) and should probably stop talking now 

Excellent point!
how much power does google use!?!?
what about centrifuges to separate weapons grade uranium? (thank god they don't use calutrons anymore!)
and the list goes on and on, mining, is irrelevant in the planetary scale IMHO.

thats the point. there is nothing better for the forseeable future. if there was we would have had thumbstick drive size gaming pc`s capable of 4k resolution by now.  it moves so fast now because they where miles behind. once the gap has closed things wil be quiet again for at least a few years.

and the coops that do exist are just small because  there isnt any real money there, since the people in it cant afford anything on their own.. and when asic prices come down a lot as competition rises, there will be just a handfull of people who would even consider a coop. if they can buy an asic for a couple of houndred dollars which they can run for a few years and it wil still generate more money then electricity will cost.