Quote from: Tortoise75 on November 23, 2017, 09:01:06 AM

Quote from: iikun on November 23, 2017, 03:58:24 AM

Quote from: cryptmebro on November 23, 2017, 03:18:05 AM

Quote from: carlo_0000 on November 23, 2017, 12:46:06 AM

Quote from: cryptmebro on November 23, 2017, 12:31:10 AM

So let me get this straight. Theres a bunch of people investing in specialized hardware to support and secure this network efficiently and you all want to punish them by switching mining algo's? They believe in DGB and want to accumulate as much as they can through mining, somehow there's a problem with it? It's called competition.

Yes, I can agree with switching out dead algo's such as qubit.

they will still be asic algo but now if we do nothing they will be no cpu&gpu algo anymore onyl asic

and you think it s fair when someone is doing close to 1 million dgb a day and probably dumping it everyday?

They are actively investing in the network. Swap the shitty qubit algo for a better cpu algo and leave the rest alone. No need to force the miners out so people can get their easy coins. If that happens, the network will be less secure and less valued overall.

To a certain extent I have to agree. Fighting asics is like fighting against the natural progression of technology, which is weird, especially for new tech like crypto.
Would Bitcoin have grown as much as it has if everyone still used massive GPU farms, sucking down electricity like the proverbial? Lower costs of mining mean fewer coins need to be dumped to pay for it, which is a good thing.

To an extent I agree as well, that's why I wouldn't want to swap the strongest of the Baikal algos. But there's no need to keep 2 or more algos dominated by the same specialized hardware.

How is it better that it's now even more massive ASIC miner farms sucking down electricity like the proverbial? The individual machine may be hugely more efficient but since the gains are limited and controlled by the difficulty the whole thing is still mostly based on costs of electricity vs value of the mined coins as long as enough hardware is available. If the hardware is not available in those numbers, from several manufacturers in a variety of markets, it's a risk for the security of the blockchain, which is actually a concern lasting on Bitcoin for quite some while now and it still didn't cut down electricity use, not enough to stop all the 'Madness! Electricity enough to power cities wasted to generate useless electronic currency' stuff in the mainstream press at least, which, along that it's otherwise mostly only mentioned together with ransomware and other criminal activities, doesn't exactly help it's image.

I agree with your first point, no need to keep more than one of the Baikal algos.

The electricity point I was more just thinking out loud, and probably that the first halving was roughly when asics first hit probably clouds my memory a little as to exactly when the price started booming. Regardless, it is a lot easier to have an asic in your home that a whole bunch of GPUs etc. Especially if one of your GPUs starts sparking and flames up like one of mine did once (oops). And not everyone lives in a country where we can just put things out in the garage...I don't have much room for anything larger than a PC tower so I appreciate being able to keep things compact. Regardless, I think we're basically in agreement...leave one or two algos for asics, make sure one is cpu, one is gpu and everyone is happy and willing to keep supporting the network.