Quote from: aliashraf on October 17, 2018, 02:30:36 PM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on October 17, 2018, 07:12:02 AM

Good luck in finding a solution.

Quote

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.

There exists no such thing as a miner in bitcoin network, I suppose by miners you mean pools, there will be no signaling neither any negotiations, pools are the main target and they are to be extinguished.

I mean that whole part of Bitcoin. Miners, pools, ASIC makers.

Quote

How?
I admit it is one of the most sophisticated problems in bitcoin right now, getting rid of pools and transition to a truly decentralized heterogeneous network but you always find it more convenient to face a problem when both it is recognized by most people as a serious problem and there is hope/technology to overcome it.

I think both ASICs and pools have triggered enough hatred and protests again themselves and the ugly face of centralized mining is nothing to be covered by any means, the fact that they've been tolerated that long is a result of the lack of an ultimate solution especially for pools and this is what we should focus on: preparing a solution. The community will decide how and when to adopt it.

To be quite honest, I believe there is no way for any POW coin to be ASIC-resistant. If the coin has value, there will be ASIC made.

Quote from: funkenstein on October 18, 2018, 06:27:59 AM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on October 17, 2018, 07:12:02 AM

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

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.

True, and reason for concern. However:

1) This shouldn't be compared to the problem of private issuance, or fiat money

But it will make the project a failure and worthless.

Quote

2) Users already have tools to evade this kind of censorship, such as alternative chains, coinjoins, pseudonymity, stealth addresses, ...

I believe you misunderstood. "Bitcoin's transaction processors" are the miners.