Proposal “change-X11“ (Closed)Back

Title:Change of X11 mining algorithm because of ASIC
Owner:SnowHater
One-time payment: 5 DASH (1363 USD)
Completed payments: no payments occurred yet (1 month remaining)
Payment start/end: 2016-04-06 / 2016-05-21 (added on 2016-02-29)
Final voting deadline: in passed
Votes: 40 Yes / 389 No / 0 Abstain
External information: www.dashwhale.org/p/change-X11

Proposal description

Please describe your thoughts about the proposal on the DashTalk.org. You can watch voting dynamic here.

Gist of the proposal


We propose a change of the current X11 mining algorithm in order to prevent inevitable centralization of DASH network through supplant of numerous and friendy community of regular miners- enthusiasts with a really narrow and exclusive group of brand new ASICs users. Mining centralization spoils Bitcoin network a lot nowadays, we don't want to repeat the same scheme here in DASH.


Why?

Mining in cryptocurrencies serves two main purposes:
1) initial incentivisation new users to come in and bootstrap the network growth;
2) securitizing the network (decentralization).

At the dawn of X11 implementation this algorithm was new and unique. It helped our network to survive in wild cryto jungles while it was a newborn child. It protected us from attacks of more powerful network miners like bitcoin miners and ASICs. But nobody can stop the progress from happening. So now we have new threat for our decentralization, ASICs. Invisibly and secretly they creeped here. Price of the ASICs that are publicly listed on the market for the moment (and therefore are already outdated in their performance) is 20 times higher than price of regular videocard (GPU). ASICs have 8 times higher hashrate per USD than GPUs have. Energy consumption per USD is pretty much the same. Next generation of ASIC will be more and more expensive, and that fact will squeeze out more and more ordinary miners from the DASH community. We described just few bad consequences of ASICs introduction. Let's give you more of them.


Harm of the ASICs:

- minimum 8 times decrease in the network attack costs for an adversary;
- long term price decrease, even with the possibility of temporal peak;
- decreased numbers of live human beings involved in the community, increased threshold to opt-in for ordinary miners, massive miners migration to ASIC-resistant currencies such as Ethereum;
- narrow group of people which secretly uses latest generation of ASICs will get up to 45% of all blockrewards from the network. They can supplant the rest of the miners (GPUs and old ASICs) gradually without even visible peak in the network overall hashrate;
- the same narrow group can easily buy new masternodes instead of dumping their reward on exchanges, so that they can corrupt the governance by lobbing its will,
- centralization of the network, increased possibility of attacks via raw force or financial seizure of big mining farms.


Pros for algorithm change

+ increased security, increased level of decentralization
+ increased popularity, new users to come
+ really huge resonance in the world of crypto. DASH could be the first cryptocurrency in the world which decides in decentralized way that it should become ASIC-resistant again. News titles could be something like that: "Collective mind of DASH proved to be smarter than ASIC manufacturers", "DASH didn't give up like Bitcoin", "DASH is stronger than ASICs", "DASH hits back" and so on.


Pool centralization

There is pool centralization threat also. It is not the object of this proposal though. Maybe in future we will bring this problem as an proposal too. Moreover, we hope that someone else will do it before us. Indeed, security and network decentralization should be a very hot topics here.


What do we want?

We want really detailed discussion of the problem within DASH community. We should consider all pros and cons of the possible solutions to it. Please describe your thoughts about the proposal on the DashTalk.org.

We have detailed publication on the topic here, but unfortunately it is in Russian language. Sorry for my poor English, I'm not native speaker.

Show full description ...

Discussion: Should we fund this proposal?

Submit comment
 
0 points,1 year ago
DASH doesn't actually need mining. PRoof of Service metrics provide more points of security than mining, but are being neglected because reasons...
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
Proposal was closed. In my opinion that was unnecessary due to the fact that it wasn't going to be voted 'yes' anyway.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
It seems like you don't trust your own community to decide what is good and what is bad for them.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
I sure don't. They'll vote the roof down on their own heads. Damn stupid. Whaa I was mean, go find a safe place, you're so triggered...
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
Sorry, about that. I didn't know that any proposal with net vote count less than -10% unilists automatically.
Reply
1 point,1 year ago
There is some objections
1) New algo is full hardfork. Therefore we will need to update whole network (miners, masternodes, payment-gateways, end-users). This can create very negative reaction and shove off users and change price.
2) In any case centralization springing up on mining-pools and there is no difference what device connected to pool (GPU, ASIC ot smth. else).
3) ASIC is more powersafe device. It have small operating cost. ASICs will be used by professional miners, who invest into mining for a long time. Also, they can't change mining currency because ASIC works for X11 only. ASIC miners more interested in network development. Also, a greate network hashrate gets a more security for network in theory.
4) If we change algo we lost a big count of investors and miners who spend a lot of money for buy or develop ASICs. It's not fairly.
5) New algo it's not a insure from new ASIC.
6) If DASH used only by miner and we must do everything for their it's a very sad end. If this were in bitcoin I suppose that I never open a bitcoin for me. DASH must have more different users not only in crypto-community for sucsessful progress, and as result we will have many different miners with different devices.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
It's way to late in the game to be debating on this topic. Everyone voting no has already invested a lot of money in purchasing their first x11 ASIC's.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
i could respond to that by saying that everyone voting yes has already invested a lot of money in purchasing GPU mining equipment and are simply trying to protect their own interest here.....

anyways i voted against this proposal eventhough i'm not invested in mining equipment (ASIC or otherwise) because
i believe ASIC brings more network security and is also the next logical step forward. We had two full years of CPU & GPU mining and have by now grown secure enough to handle ASIC miners. Its evolution in progress.....
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
You are mistaken. With ASIC network centralization is growing therefore it will more vulnerable to manipulation.
"Next logical step forward" is not necessarily the right step. Bitcoin history confirmed it.
Reply
2 points,1 year ago
There should be no change in price - the same amount of coins are produced no matter what is mining. The only difference is with ASICs the network is stronger(higher difficulty). Centralization can happen with GPUs just like ASICs. A mining farm can be made with a few hundred GPUs just like it can with ASICs. Voting no. The network has an advantage with more hashing power.
Reply
1 point,1 year ago
Mining farm can be made with GPUs but it will take you minimum 8 times more expensive than with first generation of ASICs.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
Sorry, I can't edit my messages here. Mistypos will be numerous). I guess we should better be talking on Dashtalk.org
Reply
2 points,1 year ago
The mistake you made was throwing away 5 DASH. This idea is wrong for many reasons.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
It wasn't my 5 DASH. I was donated by some part of Russian community. Claim you reasons here, please: https://dashtalk.org/threads/budget-proposal-change-of-x11-mining-algorithm-because-of-asics.8177/
Reply
1 point,1 year ago
The biggest difference between BTC/LTC.. and Dash in mining:
in BTCs: monopoly the Hashpower = monopoly 100% of distribution.
in Dash: it's ≠.
This is another valuable point in Dash ecosystem that have been established.
Reply
1 point,1 year ago
Strictly speaking, the pools are causing centralization. It doesn't matter if the hashes come from ASICs, GPUs or CPUs if they all get funneled through coinmine.pl. There should be another proposal to bring back an 'Official DASH' 0% fee mining pool, and set up an 'Official DASH' p2pool.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
I guess ASICs enforce really strong hashrate distribution disparity among human beings (live miners). This big disproportion of hashrate causes disproportion of rewards. Regular miners (majority, but not in terms of hashrate anymore) become not profitable, they go away in other currencies. Much fewer ASICs users stay. So this causes centralization.

But again, pools are the problem too. Hope you can submit a proposal about it.
Reply
1 point,1 year ago
Voted no the same way as i voted no on the Dashtalk poll (you know.. the one that has 76% in favor of NO)
So whats next ? a poll on Bitcointalk ?
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
So what is so bad about polls? I guess with this poll I personally did you richer. Relax and enjoy)). Or write out your thoughts detailed in Dashtalk topic, the new one.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
*made you richer, sorry.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
4 yes, 318 no: I'm quite surprised by this ratio. Is the debate already closed?
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
Centralization is bad. Asic in bitcoin infrastructure is way to increase amount of investments, but Dash give better way: masternodes. This vote will show how many investors understand what is the difference between bitcoin and Dash. More hash is no more safe. This misconception also occurred from bitcoin. The desire to be like "older brother" is detrimental. I voted YES.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
It's tempting to snag another "first cryptocurrency to do X" trophy. What are some cons to changing the algorithm?
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
I think that the ASIC creation is just the natural next step in Dash's development. I'm happy that companies are deciding to invest in Dash in this way. I wouldn't want to cut them out now, that would send a bad message to future investors. I'm not supporting this proposal, but I respect your opinion as well, SnowHater.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
Thanks for you opinion on that. If I get you right your main priority is just that DASH would grow further and become more and more successful company. I respect this desire. That is definitely possible in case that DASH provides to its users many useful services. But we have dozens of such successful companies already. Paypal, Google, Microsoft and so on. What would be the difference between DASH and Paypal then, if DASH becomes centralized. IMHO, the key value of any cryptocurrency for the ordinary users is that it is decentralized.
Reply
1 point,1 year ago
It is very exhausting and confusing to have or follow this discussion/pole on 3 different pages !
you should have stick to your 1st pole
Udjin made it very clear here:
https://dashtalk.org/threads/should-we-change-the-mining-algorithm-because-of-asics.8160/page-2#post-86192
(there is more to mining than just hardware , Pools are the key)
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
well only some mining power will be kinda "centralized" (but anyone can setup a pool buy ASIC...). But still decentralized in way that no one can do QE like in fiat... we can still give rewards via masternodes and miners at the same time in little favor of miners (they're burning a lot of electricity) maybe that'd be the best balanced solution.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
I'm really curious to hear opinions on this one.
Reply
-1 point,1 year ago
ASIC mining companies is not the type of Dash investors we want to attract. A big YES here. We should keep changing the algorithm to discourage mining centralization and Dash dumping.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
"Dumping" is happening now. It happened throughout DASH's history and will continue as long as there is mining. Why would you assume GPU miners are not dumping DASH as soon as it is confirmed?
Reply
-2 points,1 year ago
If you're looking to BURN any more DASH, you can send it here: Xt5HtQ9ZdwHjSYDezSKS5E6U8o9TtApfT7

What a waste of 5 DASH ($20)

LMFAO - LOL
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
This proposal and discussion are legit, they're not a waste.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
Votes: 37 Yes / 346 No
...say's it all.

Proposal(s) should not be used as a "discussion platform" - that should be reserved for the forum(s). Even the "poll" on DashTalk clearly states that "the people" will vote: NAY

Again, - - - wasted DASH.
Reply