Quote from: sjyi on May 29, 2018, 03:58:04 AM

Quote from: BenRickert on May 28, 2018, 06:06:53 PM

Quote from: jmigdlc99 on May 28, 2018, 03:29:48 AM

Quote from: BenRickert on May 28, 2018, 03:22:44 AM

Who would you rather be? The Software developer that has to rewrite the software of your protocol to fork away from the ASIC, or the Hardware manufacturer who changes the Algo to hash on the new forked protocol? I'll take the latter....every time.

This is a separate topic on it's own but i would pick the former, software developer, any time. It's simply much more profitable to do so.

Imagine how much power and money Vitalik has, with a click of his fingers he could influence the entire ETH dev team to fork and destroy the E3. He could also short and destroy mining or the entire ETH network by uploading some bad code. He knows exactly when updates are going to happen beforehand and could even use this opportunity to buy ETH before it pumps. It is so profitable to be Vitalik Buterin.

This is a completely different scope than what we are referring to. The topic at hand is the reactive response by Software Engineers to ASIC's coming onto their pre-existing networks. Then, once they react one time, the ASIC manufacturers can just reprogram to the new "resistant" software. ASIC = Offense, Software Engineer is on defensive. Besides, they have to take the entire protocol and the users into account before constantly changing the program. It's just not as easy as it sounds. ASIC offensive redesigns are fairly simple and fast. Eventually if a team mishandles the changing of programs to circumvent ASIC, they run a very real risk of losing their Coin to the fork and to the ASIC community.

I think you can agree that Buterin or "little dracula" or whatever his name is... is quite the exception and not the rule.

Chicken or the egg?
For Ethereum the software came first and ASIC is only now catching up. So when software changes the mining requirement the ASIC will need to catch up. But if that cycle keeps on repeating, does it even matter which is the cause and which is the effect of the latest revision? Each change becomes the effect of the previous cycle and the cause for the next cycle.

Jesus....you people just don't get it. Changing the HARDWARE does not put the protocol at risk of dilution or being taken from the hardware manufacturer. They risk nothing. What the fuck do you think is going to happen to ANY coin if it has to rewrite it's software and or FORK every time an ASIC manufacturer builds a unit to mine it? In answer to the other myopic twit's imbecilic post about the Great and Powerfull Count Chokula Buterin. Bitmain made 4 Billion dollars last year. How much did that Omnipotent Developer make? Huh

You think he can change ETH with the flick of his wrist or a push of a button?!?!?! LMGDAO!! He can't do SHIT. That's why he's been jerking off to POS articles for the last 1.5 years but can't do anything about changing it. 1.5 years to have a BETA version of Casper. yeah....just a snap of the fingers. Just read this article and learn something. Stop posting this schoolyard bullshit. https://blog.sia.tech/the-state-of-cryptocurrency-mining-538004a37f9b