📅 Original date posted:2016-05-11 📝 Original message:On 11 May 2016 at 16:18, ...

Jannes Faber [ARCHIVE] /

npub17pt…wqxx

2023-06-07 17:50:37

in reply to nevent1q…glkt

📅 Original date posted:2016-05-11
📝 Original message:On 11 May 2016 at 16:18, Sergio Demian Lerner via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> Jorge Timón said..
> > What do you mean by "embrace" in the context of a patented optimization
> that one miner can prevent the rest from using?
>
> Everyone seems to assume that one ASIC manufacturer will get the advantage
> of AsicBoost while others won't. If a patent license is non-exclusive, then
> all can.
>
>

1. Whatever way you look at it, it will be an extra barrier of entry (cost,
legal hassle, more complex chip design) for any new ASIC manufacturer
trying to enter the market. That counters free competition and thus
decentralization.

2. Why would you want to put yourself in the central spot of the big
decider on who gets access to the technology (and therefore the whole
mining game) and who doesn't. You're not afraid of NSA knocking on your
door to politely hand you their blacklist? You don't think this counters
all the years of hard work that went into Bitcoin exactly to avoid any such
central points of authority?

P.S. I'm not decided yet on being for or against a HF to ban AsicBoost
myself, nor does my opinion count for much. But I think I do see real
problems, like the above.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160511/58f1e77b/attachment-0001.html>;

Author Public Key

npub17ptfn7hft8a4s25t6449tdsnht7krskz8xsqh302vma0pjm6925qcdwqxx

Show more details

Published at

2023-06-07 17:50:37

Kind type

1 Short Text Note

Event JSON

{ "id": "51399a26dd0225aa61bf24ecdc3b3fdb53908ba6d894f6021f7d7a2d29291fdc", "pubkey": "f05699fae959fb582a8bd56a55b613bafd61c2c239a00bc5ea66faf0cb7a2aa8", "created_at": 1686160237, "kind": 1, "tags": [ [ "e", "b74d6e3e945ee090c612026984f249efe6d61ca521fddbb0329fa69f81265a0b", "", "root" ], [ "e", "223ecf2aafbf92f667db763802cd0de6c2f8dd1e076875bf1260447e5213de49", "", "reply" ], [ "p", "4b38603408f5be002091210e869a4ca86fc2aa1ffd0871036a0668068ee626ee" ] ], "content": "📅 Original date posted:2016-05-11\n📝 Original message:On 11 May 2016 at 16:18, Sergio Demian Lerner via bitcoin-dev \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e Jorge Timón said..\n\u003e \u003e What do you mean by \"embrace\" in the context of a patented optimization\n\u003e that one miner can prevent the rest from using?\n\u003e\n\u003e Everyone seems to assume that one ASIC manufacturer will get the advantage\n\u003e of AsicBoost while others won't. If a patent license is non-exclusive, then\n\u003e all can.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\n1. Whatever way you look at it, it will be an extra barrier of entry (cost,\nlegal hassle, more complex chip design) for any new ASIC manufacturer\ntrying to enter the market. That counters free competition and thus\ndecentralization.\n\n2. Why would you want to put yourself in the central spot of the big\ndecider on who gets access to the technology (and therefore the whole\nmining game) and who doesn't. You're not afraid of NSA knocking on your\ndoor to politely hand you their blacklist? You don't think this counters\nall the years of hard work that went into Bitcoin exactly to avoid any such\ncentral points of authority?\n\nP.S. I'm not decided yet on being for or against a HF to ban AsicBoost\nmyself, nor does my opinion count for much. But I think I do see real\nproblems, like the above.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160511/58f1e77b/attachment-0001.html\u003e", "sig": "9dcf43bfa4119ffb6afa223d55aa2151a78fb781cae617c175745b81d6ceea050590db40606a402f3fa42c6e5d15bb1298b5aaab935d5f534e1adcb7952a8db1" }