The fact that X11 was supposed to be ASIC resistant, and therefore more accessible to individual miners with off-the-shelf mining rigs, but turned out not to be shows that X11 should be reassessed.
Education is what needs to be re-assessed.
LTC already prove this when it fraudulently touted scrypt as being ASIC-proof.
Any static algorithm is, in fact, suited to ASIC better than anything else. It's a static algorithm! Duh!
The more complex you make it,the slower it goes on CPU/GPU, but, duh, this is exactly what ASICs do best! It's not only "not ASIC-resistant" it's ASIC specific!
Application Specific Integrated Circuit. A.S.I.C. Hashing algorithms are nothing more than very complicated Specific Applications, to which an ASIC is really the only answer... It's not just possible, is inevitable, and the best possible choice...
The fancier you get, the more suited to an ASIC it becomes. The only thing that determines if an ASIC is created for it, is if the coin in question is worth the investment.
The fact that someone needs to explain that is sad.
Now, using other network metrics that exist in Proof of Service, to completely eliminate the electron waste that is mining... That's something worth talking about. Stack the votes into Proof of Service by adding an "abstain" option, and you've got spectacular entropy...
If anyone ever claims that their hashing algorithm is "ASIC-resistant" that person is a fucking liar and you should kick them in the nuts until they bleed out their ears.
