CIP-102: Change PoW mining algorithm

#22

In my opinion, this idea is just terrible. You propose to make another fork of the ether from an independent network. How will we then be different from thousands of other unknown forks of the ether? what about TPS? Let’s reduce them from unique 3000 to ether 15? ))
So, i am personally with the project from the beginning public mining. I am a miner, holder and i have a personal POS node. And I do all this only in the original cfx network (minenet space). I don’t even use eSpace. I don’t like that eSpace is made on Ethereum technologies. It destroys the uniqueness of cfx. And if cfx will switches to the ether algorithm then the last uniqueness of the project will be destroyed. IMHO

Also… if someone will want to got a more miners in cfx net no need change algo just lite bit up the price on MH then ETH and miners will come immediately )))

4 Likes
#23

The best decision right now is to attract Ethereum miners.
Ensuring network security & Attracting new users and capital :+1::heart:
:dart:

1 Like
#24

It would be a good way to market and publicize the cfx network, since it has many positive qualities but they are not yet revealed to the majority of the crypto world.

1 Like
#25

螺丝厂前来布局

#26

4袋长老在此，片总现出原形

#27

Pro:

  • High Visibility
  • More miners = higher security
  • Lower DAG Size (something around 5GB would be great)
  • Lower Power Consumption
  • Better profitability for AMD cards

Cons:

  • ASICs
  • Risk to have ETH disadvantages (TPS, Finality Time, Transaction Fees, …)

Neutral:

  • Check if TPS remains the same
  • Check if Finality Time remains the same
  • Tree Graph possible with Ethash
2 Likes
#28

It could be a good idea if you can keep the same TPS and treegraph with ethash but I doubt of it. If you choose this option surely you will have a ratio of the mining farm who will come and have a positive impact on price, because usually price is in correlation with hashrate. The direct consequence will be positive I think but if you can t keep the same TPS and treegraph so the Blockchain will be like a new copy and at term will be without interest. In the same time, I think you will loose your previous community of miners. They can’t compete with farms. I think they will wait price goes up to sell and mine directly an other coin like ergo or flux after ethash activate. There is risk also to loose decentralisation with ethash asics farm. But at term I think if price follow it could be ok. So to conclude if you can keep the technology of treegraph and the same TPS with ethash DO IT, if you can’t DO NOT

#29

Here is a good example what must do Conflux Team in premerge of ETH time, plz check how real experience cryptomining company look on Octopus and Conflux: https://www.prlog.org/12930824-prohashing-announces-the-official-release-of-the-octopus-algorithm.html
Would be good to share own experience of that CIP author in cryptomining. Coz looks like he is a only hear about it.
Want to share my respect to all community members who are share their opinions here and also add my own point of view.

  1. Octopus algo based on Dagger Hashimoto(original name of Ethhash). So here no any problems to reseat on CFX from ETH for “green” miners and some of “red” miners too and support CFX on Octopus;
  2. Same kind of CIPs must include results of hard tests and comparing stats of blockchain network with same setting (block time, Difficulty Adjustment, confirmation amount for full unlock, etc.). Without same it’s not a CIP, just not more than simple discussion thread on forum. Author of CIP are already register here but not active long time after one hot discussion about consensus type of CFX. For sure, miners not be at most discuss any via GitHub as it’s must be when CIP represented to public discussions. And he is not interested in open forum thread for discuss his proposal with community. He not make any tests as must do.
  3. As we all known, after Hydra Hardfork roles of PoW miners in CFX consensus was set on second plan. PoS miners has a extra rights and priority in verification and tx signing. So, it’s a bit joke for now represent CIPs oriented on increasing PoW miners interest and say anything about support and increasing decentralisation.
  4. Most part of ETH miners not a mecenats, but they are make a business, so they are mined ETH coz it’s profitable. Think that with Eth miners here come in same as their hashes investments and CFX price would be pumped and correlated with difficulty pumping not more that weet dreams. Eth early investors who are hold premine control and make Eth market all that years. For now they are not interested in that and go to PoS. Here in CFX early investors are partially sell at full, partially continue received unlocked funds, sell and go out. Team make same. Lol
    So, in that case, if CFX go to Ethash here on short time increase difficulty, old supporters, all who are not go out till moment, go out, coz project drop one of its main exclusive point (at real it’s a last what are CFX not lose from launch till now- octopus algo). Price for sure would be on flat after go down with miners profits gone Eth miners.(need to say that Eth miners has a various numbers of Eth like and not only chains where they can put in their hashes and which are not controlled by centralised PoS layer/chain) And also all of that have a high chance to catch various types of forks (issues) in CFX blockchain/source. At the end you got dump of CFX markets and miners community, community at all. For up interest to CFX better stop dump it and increase centralisation as you do that last 2 years. Coz it’s really funny to see same CIPs from team which are launched under “not same as ETH” slogans. :clown_face:
    Good luck. Cheers to active CFX community. But it’s decreasing every day.
3 Likes
#30

i like this idea, but it would need to be a modified ethash algo, like etchash. because 51% attacks will be likely if its the native ethash

#31

Etc was successfully attacked via 51% attack vector three times, two times in a row. And main reason why they was successful not in mining algo, but simple in low level of hashes on ETC side with token price that make attack profitable. Attack 51% can be done on any of algo.

2 Likes
#32

从技术上来说，是自我否定做法，为了市场倒退不是技术原因，而是生存原因。绥靖政策的由来。。。
改变算法就能让更多人来参与么？难说。。自我意淫，
币价涨就什么都来了，和技术无关，和算法更无关。以太转POS不见得矿工就来树图
再说摒弃自我都没好下场的
这些天观察，改了可能更滥。倒退的技术更没戏。。

1 Like
#33

If algorithm change is needed it better be Autolykos.
… works good on AMD GPUs, has low power consumption no asics.
The sheer lunacy of updating to ethash is baffling? Has anyone been paid by bitmain here?!
Come on… Updating to ethash after the merge is literally kicking GPUs off the network… How was this proposal even allowed to occur here in the first place is just amazing… That’s my 3 cfx

2 Likes
#34

找对病用对药才，解决通胀的问题才是重点，流通量太多了 。算法改变解决不了通胀问题的

#35

As has been mentioned by many miners, moving to EThash makes no sense. It is not ASIC resistant and the rationale is not sufficient to make such a large change since for any serious miner, changing mining algos/software is trivial.

#36

改个毛。。改了也一样，也没必要，有得必有失，不见得原来以太的算法就是好的，好好的自己的算法二年了挺安全，瞎整啥呢。涨治百病，关建有价格放在哪里，哪怕是腌肉也行。
老计较杀的是哪个品种的猪肉干哈呢。。。

1 Like
#37

收益已经是之前的三分之一了 改算法是投票还是什么

1 Like