{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub17w8rw3wtcr03zdsdjhmcj37w0g6l79gsspleltsznexdktv0qw0qd3nc05","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub17w8rw3wtcr03zdsdjhmcj37w0g6l79gsspleltsznexdktv0qw0qd3nc05","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2017-04-08\n📝 Original message:Pavel,\n\n\n\u003e I agree. I only wanted to make clear, that the impact would be\n\u003e significant. Lot of parties would be involved with nonequivalent\n\u003e starting positions.\n\u003e\n\u003e\nI agree with you. I believe nonequivalent starting positions are the norm\nin mining, not the exception and hence don't believe this to be a problem.\n\n\n\u003e\n\u003e I think the ASICBoost can and should be prevented completely.\n\u003e\n\nIt certainly can be and from the responses I'm getting, I believe there\nwould be at least a few people that would enthusiastically support a BIP to\ndo that. That is, however, a separate issue than my proposal. My proposal\naims to bring ASICBoost out into the open *while it is still possible*. A\nBIP to prevent ASICBoost completely is in that sense compatible.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170408/06fbf04c/attachment.html\u003e"}