Quote from: aliashraf on October 16, 2018, 09:30:39 AM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on October 16, 2018, 06:38:05 AM

Quote from: aliashraf on October 15, 2018, 10:13:08 AM

No hash power cut-off. Imagine we implant a secondary ASIC-resistant cpu/gpu friendly algo (like ProgPow) and define two parallel difficulty adjustment systems which regulate blocks mined by sha2 at 11 blocks per every 2 hours ratio while gpus are set to generate 1 block in the same window also suppose we use a gradual re-adjustment policy by introducing a decrease/increase strategy for above parameters. See? no cut-off!

How many hard forks will that take?

What would make you so sure that Bitmain will not make new ASICs for the new mining algorithm?

It is just ONE hard fork. The ratio is adjusted deterministically by virtue of the protocol, just like halving in legacy bitcoin.

Quote

Good luck in finding a solution.

Solution is almost ready, implementation is the phase.

Sincerely good luck. But I believe the idea has already failed before it has started. The miners will never signal their readiness for a hard fork that will kill them. The community would also not want to risk a chain-split.

Quote from: funkenstein on October 17, 2018, 06:25:32 AM

1) Bitcoin doesn't care what language miners are speaking or what lines orcs have drawn on maps to satisfy their mental deficiencies. Also there is no person called "China", there are many people here with different agendas. To use English properly please avoid assigning agency to non-agents.

2) Sure there may be problems with centralized pools and ASIC manufacturers, but the money supply and transactions can still all be public despite these problems. In other words, we are still worlds above a privately issued currency system (fiat). We aren't talking about abuses such as issuing arbitrary amounts of monetary units for ourselves here, so it really isn't fare to compare this kind of centralization with the kind witnessed in fiat systems.

Theoretically if there is enough of Bitcoin's "transaction processors" centralized geographically in one country, that country's government can threaten them, and make the "processors" censor some transactions that that country's government does not like.