Dev-list's stance on potentially altering the PoW algorithm [combined summary]

• Dev-list's stance on potentially altering the PoW algorithm Milly Bitcoin 2015-10-02 23:19:11+00:00
• Dev-list's stance on potentially altering the PoW algorithm Dave Scotese 2015-10-02 21:37:09+00:00
• Dev-list's stance on potentially altering the PoW algorithm Luke Dashjr 2015-10-02 21:31:21+00:00
• Dev-list's stance on potentially altering the PoW algorithm Gregory Maxwell 2015-10-02 16:45:45+00:00
• Dev-list's stance on potentially altering the PoW algorithm Peter R 2015-10-02 16:38:26+00:00
• Dev-list's stance on potentially altering the PoW algorithm Jorge Timón 2015-10-02 11:00:57+00:00
• Dev-list's stance on potentially altering the PoW algorithm NxtChg 2015-10-02 10:46:30+00:00
• Dev-list's stance on potentially altering the PoW algorithm Daniele Pinna 2015-10-02 08:31:34+00:00
• Dev-list's stance on potentially altering the PoW algorithm Adam Back 2015-10-02 08:30:57+00:00
• Dev-list's stance on potentially altering the PoW algorithm Daniele Pinna 2015-10-02 08:30:40+00:00
• Dev-list's stance on potentially altering the PoW algorithm Jorge Timón 2015-10-02 08:20:55+00:00
• Dev-list's stance on potentially altering the PoW algorithm Daniele Pinna 2015-10-02 08:02:43+00:00

Published on: 2015-10-02T23:19:11+00:00

Summary:

The bitcoin community has been engaged in a debate about changing the proof-of-work (PoW) function and how it could potentially protect against ASIC/FPGA optimization. Some suggest gradually introducing new hash algorithms through ongoing competitions to create an ASIC-resistant PoW, while others argue that hardware optimization cannot be completely prevented. The term "ASIC-resistance" has been criticized as an absurd term coined to promote altcoins.In response to concerns about centralization caused by hoarding of mining ASICs, restarting mining with a new algorithm has been proposed as a potential solution. However, economists should be consulted on these claims rather than developers. It is also noted that changing the language of Core to prevent developer centralization was suggested as a joke.Discussions have taken place on the bitcoin-dev mailing list regarding the feasibility of protecting against ASIC/FPGA optimization. It is argued that guaranteeing such protection is impossible, as anything that can be done with software can also be done with hardware. However, BIP99 suggests the use of "anti-miner hardforks" to restart the ASIC and mining market if centralization becomes an issue.A recently published paper proposes an asymmetric memory-hard PoW algorithm that could potentially alter the bitcoin PoW protocol to protect against ASIC/FPGA optimization. This algorithm addresses the limitations of the Cuckoo cycle algorithm. However, there are also papers demonstrating the impossibility of protecting against ASIC/FPGA optimization. The author seeks clarification on the stance of core developers regarding potential changes to the bitcoin PoW protocol.Overall, the debates surrounding the PoW function and ASIC/FPGA optimization highlight the need for careful consideration and analysis. While some propose solutions to enhance decentralization and protect against centralization caused by hoarding of mining ASICs, others emphasize the challenges and limitations involved. The discussions raise questions about the stance of core developers on potentially altering the bitcoin PoW protocol and the implications for mining centralization and decentralization.

Updated on: 2023-08-01T16:28:36.298031+00:00