apparently being used
prove it
i do laugh at you and gmaxwell waffle about X but then throw in the "apparently" "could be" "potentially"
anyway
lets see what the maths really tells us
i would have expected antpool to have a block % of something in the 40's while having hash in the 30's if all this gmaxwell PoW propaganda was real
definitely not less than their hash%
oh well gmaxwell debunked.
kind of funny how many times gmaxwells announcement didnt name the pool and how many times gmaxwell uses the word "they could" rather then "they are"
..
just to let the script writers twist it into "its an attack, bomb them bomb them bomb them"
P.S
gotta laugh that when its an exploit.. he words it as attack on Bitcoin's SHA2 [adambacks] hashcash.
but when its a bug he calls it an bitcoin proof of work oversight....
he is too far deep inside his bosses pocket
just done some quick maths
* stats at time of post
hmm
looks like BTCC and F2pool are the ones making more blocks than their hash %
not the other way round
*for those wishing to question the numbers
* stats at time of post
hmm
looks like BTCC and F2pool are the ones making more blocks than their hash %
not the other way round
*for those wishing to question the numbers
i would have expected antpool to have a block % of something in the 40's while having hash in the 30's if all this gmaxwell PoW propaganda was real
definitely not less than their hash%
oh well gmaxwell debunked.
kind of funny how many times gmaxwells announcement didnt name the pool and how many times gmaxwell uses the word "they could" rather then "they are"
Quote
A month ago I was explaining the attack on Bitcoin's SHA2 hashcash which
is exploited by ASICBOOST and the various steps which could be used to
block it in the network if it became a problem.
While most discussion of ASICBOOST has focused on the overt method
of implementing it, there also exists a covert method for using it.
is exploited by ASICBOOST and the various steps which could be used to
block it in the network if it became a problem.
While most discussion of ASICBOOST has focused on the overt method
of implementing it, there also exists a covert method for using it.
Quote
An incompatibility would go a long way to explain some of the
more inexplicable behavior from some parties in the mining
ecosystem so I began looking for supporting evidence.
Reverse engineering of a particular mining chip has demonstrated
conclusively that ASICBOOST has been implemented
in hardware.
more inexplicable behavior from some parties in the mining
ecosystem so I began looking for supporting evidence.
Reverse engineering of a particular mining chip has demonstrated
conclusively that ASICBOOST has been implemented
in hardware.
Quote
Due to a design oversight the Bitcoin proof of work function has a potential
attack which can allow an attacking miner to save up-to 30% of their energy
costs (though closer to 20% is more likely due to implementation overheads).
attack which can allow an attacking miner to save up-to 30% of their energy
costs (though closer to 20% is more likely due to implementation overheads).
..
just to let the script writers twist it into "its an attack, bomb them bomb them bomb them"
P.S
gotta laugh that when its an exploit.. he words it as attack on Bitcoin's SHA2 [adambacks] hashcash.
but when its a bug he calls it an bitcoin proof of work oversight....
he is too far deep inside his bosses pocket