pull down to refresh
141 sats \ 16 replies \ @quark 13 Nov 2023 \ on: Reasons to prefer blake3 over sha256 bitcoin
Imagine if we go and fork to using Blake and make all miner ASICS useless 😂
Imagine if SHA256 is suddenly broken and make all miner ASICs useless
then we go and fork to ASIC-proof GPU mineable algo, as Satoshi wanted:
https://cointelegraph.com/news/satoshi-invented-gpu-mining-to-defend-the-network-says-early-dev
reply
then we go and fork to ASIC-proof GPU mineable algo, as Satoshi wanted:
maybe I didn't read the article properly since I already know the story from another source
but where in this is mentioned that Satoshi wanted an ASIC-proof GPU mineable algo?
reply
"the big attraction is that anybody can download Bitcoin and start mining"
and he wanted "big attraction" or he didn't want ?
reply
Why remove the "But right now" from the quote?
The actual quote is:
"But right now, the big attraction is that anybody can download Bitcoin and start mining with their laptop."
reply
so wouldn't he like to have a big attraction as long as possible - like almost every human being? :)
reply
Yes but not necessarily as "anybody can download Bitcoin and start mining with their laptop". Most people probably stopped mining after they found out within a few days that it makes their machine too hot or too slow, it's too noisy, etc.
So it was always only the initial attraction. Nowadays, I would say the big attraction are the crazy bull markets.
So isn't bitcoin still a big attraction?
Since we're here thanks to all previous bull markets?
And because enough people got interested in bitcoin early on for whatever reasons?
Fascinating read, and other details?
reply
Seems like keccak is the ASIC friendly replacement for sha256, not Blake.
reply
No, keccak isn't implementable with SHA256 hashers. You'd have to make a whole new ASIC, at which point keccak or Blake could be implemented in the hardware just as easily.
reply
reply
That reply is wrong in the context of PoW mining, as PoW mining is already trivially parallelizable.
reply
deleted by author