pull down to refresh

16 sats \ 4 replies \ @harrr 25 Apr \ parent \ on: Mining centralization: the nuclear option bitcoin
If you combine 10 ASICs into one then it would be less efficient than an ASIC optimized for a single hash function right? Then those who hash with the optimized hardware will have the advantage. That seems like it would favor plebs.
You may lose some efficiency, but the basement dwelling pleb won't be able to mine 90% of the time, so they lose 90% efficiency.
write
preview
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @machuPikacchu OP 25 Apr
Then aside from hoping the pools adopt Stratum V2 what's the solution? Change the algo once every few years and repeat this process? Is there another way?
reply
10 sats \ 2 replies \ @harrr 25 Apr
Solution to which problem, fearmongering? If there is a real problem, miners can switch to a different pool whenever they want, and they are incentivized to do so as their revenue depends on bitcoin being trustless.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @machuPikacchu OP 26 Apr
The vast majority of mining equipment comes from a country whose government takes pride in censorship. That country is also expected to bring online significantly more energy production in the coming decade. They can make it difficult to change the pool that equipment mines on and most people can't be bothered to reverse engineer manufacturer firmware. Do you not see a danger in this trend continuing?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @harrr 26 Apr
Aw man. Have ASIC manufacturers sell 10 different ASICs and increase their revenue! That was your proposal to solve your first problem. Now you conjure a different problem, dude, that's just moving the goal post. I'm done here.
reply