MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CABm2gDrOt2m6xfYjtVJne6Cm2nawXtA2-a4y7kaEA1fEgkUUUA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEgR2PFQtr78B3t147=3Ko4VnTGevb0QCySk=hDSqeFHZk=MPQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABm2gDrOt2m6xfYjtVJne6Cm2nawXtA2-a4y7kaEA1fEgkUUUA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 10:30:57 +0200
Message-ID: <CALqxMTEeLBg-dN9nM7inh33_3bHXZ15a8n-pShQtLzQ2MFCA4w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Adam Back <adam@cypherspace.org>
To: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
	Daniele Pinna <daniele.pinna@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Dev-list's stance on potentially altering the PoW
	algorithm
Precedence: list

See also https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3n5nws/research_paper_as=
ymmetric_proofofwork_based_on/cvl922x

Adam

On 2 October 2015 at 10:20, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Oct 2, 2015 10:03 AM, "Daniele Pinna via bitcoin-dev"
> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> should an algorithm that guarantees protection from ASIC/FPGA optimizati=
on
>> be found.
>
> This is demonstrably impossible: anything that can be done with software =
can
> be done with hardware. This is computer science 101.
> And specialized hardware can always be more efficient, at least energy-wi=
se.
>
> On the other hand, BIP99 explicitly contemplates "anti-miner hardforks"
> (obviously not for so called "ASIC-resistance" [an absurd term coined to
> promote some altcoins], but just for restarting the ASIC and mining marke=
t
> in case mining becomes too centralized).
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>