Quote from: aliashraf on December 04, 2018, 10:46:48 AM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on December 04, 2018, 08:45:40 AM

Quote from: aliashraf on December 03, 2018, 10:17:24 AM

Quote from: HeRetiK on December 03, 2018, 09:41:48 AM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on December 03, 2018, 05:22:35 AM

But in a realistic scenario, how can Bitcoin hard fork to a new POW algorithm, with consensus, if what it will do is amputate the network of full nodes and hashing power? It will reduce the network's security by a lot.

The proposal of the idea itself is already stupid, unless the mining cartel started to censor transactions.

I seem to remember proposals of doing a gradual shift from SHA-256 to whatever hash Bitcoin would use next, precisely as to avoid (or at least alleviate) this issue, however I can't find the respective threads right now. IIRC this would include a transitional period of hybrid mining. AFAIK these proposals haven't been discussed in earnest though and I'm not quite sure about their viability.

it was me who proposed this in few contexts, not in a dedicated topic tho. For instance, discussing Chinese pools/ASIC manufacturers 50%+1 threats in a topic started by myself:

Quote from: aliashraf on October 10, 2018, 02:55:02 PM

@theymos, thanks for the contribution ...
...
From a pure technical viewpoint, unlike what most people in bitcoin ecosystem are used to say, implementing an Anti-ASIC algorithm and integrating it into bitcoin, is not impossible or that hard. We have ProgPoW and a few talented people who could offer even more effective alternatives. But for bitcoin such a transition is not feasible overnight. Nobody would be happy, security will drop, price will drop, ... a lot of chaotic consequences are predictable and should be addressed. Nobody is interested in following the path bitcoin Gold went through.

I have this idea for a long time, a 2-way concurrent PoW algorithm with a 2-3 years smooth migration from ASICs to the alternate cpu/gpu PoW method e.g. ProgPoW. I'm thinking of starting with a 10:1 ratio in favor of sha2 ASICs and a gradual transition to 1:10 ratio against them.

But as we have already experienced with SegWit reaching to a consensus and adopting above or any other hypothetical solution raises another challenge: Pools.
....

But what made you believe that such a proposal will not be contentious, or be supported by the miners? Like franky1 said, miners are also part of the Bitcoin community.

By miners you mean pools, right? And I got a solution for getting rid of pools. Wink

Will the "solution" get consensus?

Quote

Quote from: aliashraf on December 03, 2018, 10:17:24 AM

Quote

Apparently people are busy trading bitcoin rather than developing it, the true reason behind bitcoin recent fall, imo.

Whose fault is it? You must be trolling.

Whose fault is what? Ignoring ever changing environment and the threats for bitcoin?
I guess people who resist change because they have "invested" too much and spread FUD about serious improvements in bitcoin, no matter how critical would be the situation, they think 'short' about bitcoin and guess what, they are losing even more because of their stupidity.

But you are talking under the hypothesis that ProgPow will be ASIC-resistant. Reality has already shown that companies like Bitmain will make ASICs for any mining algorithm if a cryptocurrency is succesful enough because they are good at it, and it is profitable.

Plus also under the belief that it will get consensus. Don't you know how dangerous contentious hard forks are? Have we not learned from Ethereum.

Quote

By the way, how is it possible to call the same post as an act of trolling when it is merited by two respected forum member besides its absolute relevance to the topic and the discussion. Your vanity post looks to be more adequate for such a label!

Which "people" were in your mind when you said, "Apparently people are busy trading bitcoin rather than developing it, the true reason behind bitcoin recent fall, imo." The developers?

Do you believe those "people" really caused the crash?