Quote from: raywolf1 on April 09, 2018, 07:39:05 PM

Quote from: pghmyn on April 08, 2018, 07:33:32 PM

Quote from: Alex256 on April 08, 2018, 05:17:08 AM

Quote from: miketout on April 08, 2018, 05:07:00 AM

Quote from: Alex256 on April 08, 2018, 05:04:13 AM

Hello everyone!
Unbelievable, in this coin authors converted ASIC "resistant" algorithm x16r to ASIC-friendly algorithm x16s !

Can you provide a link to this info somewhere? Thanks.

It is easy to fit 16 algs into silicon and just switch datapath between them, but it is difficult to fit multiple copies of each of 16 algorithms.

I mean, you speak of the ease, so I assume you have done this already or know someone who has?

Unless you can provide concrete proof this can or has been done, your statement is about as good as your English.

Nice one

First of all, don't feed the initial troll~ Second, the coin is ASIC-resistant, not ASIC-proof. If there is enough money incentive, someone will develop an ASIC for it. However, the whitepaper already establishes that if ASICS become a problem the Devs are willing to change the algorithm (i.e. by adding Equihash into the mix) in order to break any ASICS that come out. Ultimately whether there will be ASICS for this coin will depend on 1) the success of the coin, and 2) how many other coins adopt/copy the x16s algorithm. As I understand it the algorithms are the same in x16r as in x16s, only the order is made different/random. Any suggestion that x16s is less resistant to ASICs is silly. As to whether the claim that it is more ASIC resistant than x16r, I'll leave that one to someone who is more familiar with vlsi design than I am (1 class 20ish years ago~), but I suspect that modifying a switching circuit is not going to make a drastic difference in the design of an ASIC.