Quote from: GPUHoarder on May 16, 2018, 04:22:48 PM

Quote from: rem26 on May 16, 2018, 04:07:44 PM

Quote from: GPUHoarder on May 16, 2018, 03:27:58 PM

Quote from: anorganix on May 16, 2018, 03:09:11 PM

No need, it's all I had to say.
The rest will come with time.

The group asked for my opinion and I agree. PHI2 appears to be more of the same ASIC resistance line of thinking based on some misconceptions about what makes things hard for hardware.

The fact that you lumped ASIC and FPGA resistance in one line is more telling than anything else.

To be less skeptical, show me your white paper documenting the PHI2 algorithm and decisions that were made and cryptoanalysis that was done on it to be FPGA resistant?

It also appear youve released the GPL miner binary, so I respectfully request the source.

This

To be clear I am not against coins that decide from the get-go to be ASIC resistant, even those that decide to be FPGA resistant. Im perfectly willing to design hardware to take advantage of a coins failure to actually be resistant though. The challenge alone is worth it, there are many ways to solve a problem.

What I do think is important is to hold those decisions to scrutiny. Otherwise what you have is smaller coins waving the hey we are asic resistant! flag as a marketing tool, hoping to be the next big GPU coin regardless of the validity of the claims.

They need to stand up to public review and get experts in the various disciplines to chime in on their decisions. From what I can tell PHI2 seems to have been developed in secret - and nothing is published on the algorithm itself, which makes me suspect. It also makes it clear that it hasnt been broadly reviewed and given a chance to stand on its own merits.

I like you. Now take my money and makes public Bitstreams