Should we change the mining algorithm because of ASICs?

Should we change mining algorithm because of ASICs?

  • Yes

    Votes: 10 21.3%

  • No

    Votes: 37 78.7%
  • Total voters
    47
X13 - X15 - Why not X21.......

LOL
I would think not.....
Pretty sure we had this debate at some point "back-in-the-day"

X11 has serious people looking at it - Why would we want to screw with the people that LIKE us?
 
MangledBlue said:
X13 - X15 - Why not X21.......
X11 has serious people looking at it - Why would we want to screw with the people that LIKE us?
Click to expand...
What was intentional purpose to implement X11? ASIC resistance. Now, if we have ASICs for X11 didn't this intention fail? BTW, I think this ASIC thing could be implemented more then half an year ago, and it wasn't shown to the public until now though. Could it be related to these very same 'serious people'?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you look at the original White Paper, or perhaps it was an early discussion on the BCT forum, Evan makes the point that X11 is designed to be ASIC resistant in the short term, that he intended Dash to follow a similar cycle to Bitcoin and that ASIC's would eventually be developed. The idea was that ASIC's would not be available immediately so as to have more even distribution, but the development of ASIC's eventually was expected.

I think that for any algorithm implemented ASIC's are bound to be developed once it becomes profitable to do so, no need to be playing catch up; ASIC's are a good development for infrastructure maturation.

Pablo.
 
ASICs lead to mining centralization, and that's a bad thing. So, let's assume that 1st tier of 2-tiers network becomes more and more centralized with time. And this tier gets 45% of all blockreward still. So, what will happen in time? Yep, more and more masternodes will be bought by ASIC's miners. Hadn't it already happen? Who knows. And we have only 6 millions of coins out of 19. What I'm trying to say, that once one part of a system becomes centralized, the whole system tends to become centralized too. If we don't change the algorithm why not just settle a contract with one of ASICs manufacturer about its exclusive right to produce blocks for DASH for let's say 10% of all blockchain reward instead of 45% ? :grin:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am inclined to say yes. That's because after a change like this ASIC manufacturers will be discouraged to invest more resources into DASH ASIC manufacturing. The 2nd time around they'll know better than to invest into producing more DASH ASICs. Once bitten, twice shy, as they say. ;)
 
In my opinion ASICs will replace thousands of miner and potential DASH-activists to few ASIC miners. So DASH loses on "momentum".
Possible actions: announce that DASH will change algorithm every time if there is suspect that ASIC was developed. Nobody will waste 1 Mio USD to develop ASIC-scrap. And, as always, Masternode-voting (to do: avoid, that ASIC producers hold too many Masternodes :))
Do not forget, ASIC developers never will allow somebody to earn on this. If they sell it, it means it is not really profitable any more.
 
The ASICs also create a negative price dynamic in the market, aside from centralization.

Most of the ASIC miners tend to constantly dump the coins onto the market to recover the cost of their investment. The casual home miner is more of a mining enthusiast, more inclined to keep the coins.

I think we all want to see more long term Dash holders not a bunch of ASIC professional miners constantly dumping Dash.
 
Balych said:
So, they are dump or keep?
Click to expand...

Dump, I think, because putting the coins is Masternodes is a riskier longer term play to recover their investment. Not all ASIC miners could afford it and would be willing to do it.

Most of the professional ASIC miners won't even bother learning about Masternodes. They just point their ASICs to the most profitable coin of the day to mine and dump away.
 
MangledBlue said:
X13 - X15 - Why not X21.......

LOL
I would think not.....
Pretty sure we had this debate at some point "back-in-the-day"

X11 has serious people looking at it - Why would we want to screw with the people that LIKE us?
Click to expand...
Why not X115? Seriously, we solve current problem for ~30-40 years
 
InTheWoods said:
Most of the professional ASIC miners won't even bother learning about Masternodes. They just point their ASICs to the most profitable coin of the day to mine and dump away.
Click to expand...

How about this?

Most of the professional GPU miners won't even bother learning about Masternodes. They just point their GPUs to the most profitable coin of the day to mine and dump away.

Double standard anyone?
 
oaxaca said:
How about this?

Most of the professional GPU miners won't even bother learning about Masternodes. They just point their GPUs to the most profitable coin of the day to mine and dump away.

Double standard anyone?
Click to expand...

Well at first, in the Bitcoin world, ASICs were individuals and small operations but as things matured they've become specialized big mining operations and individuals were pushed out. The Bitcoin mining space has gradually become more centralized with a handful of large key players that are now deciding the fate of Bitcoin.

I think the profile is very different. I was mining with GPU myself at some point in time but these days I don't bother anymore.
 
SnowHater said:
What was intentional purpose to implement X11? ASIC resistance. Now, if we have ASICs for X11 didn't this intention fail? BTW, I think this ASIC thing could be implemented more then half an year ago, and it wasn't shown to the public until now though. Could it be related to these very same 'serious people'?
Click to expand...

Look up the word: resistance

We are not ASIC PROOF
 
Oaxaca, if ASIC manufacturers and buyers worried about Dash masternodes they would buy. Price comparable.
 
InTheWoods said:
Well at first, in the Bitcoin world, ASICs were individuals and small operations but as things matured they've become specialized big mining operations and individuals were pushed out. The Bitcoin mining space has gradually become more centralized with a handful of large key players that are now deciding the fate of Bitcoin.
Click to expand...

Show me some proof that GPU miners mining DASH are "mine and hold" instead of "mine and dump". ALL miners that are mining coins are "mine and dump" until proven otherwise. Every day X number of DASH is added to the total supply. Every day Y DASH are purchased using fresh money into the system. If Y is greater than X ("mine and hold"), the price of DASH would keep going up. It remains relatively stable. Because GPUers are just as likely as ASICers to just dump. No difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top