rich1.0npub17w8rw3wtcr03zdsdjhmcj37w0g6l79gsspleltsznexdktv0qw0qd3nc05https://nostr.ae/npub17w8rw3wtcr03zdsdjhmcj37w0g6l79gsspleltsznexdktv0qw0qd3nc05njumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2017-04-08 📝 Original message:Pavel, > I agree. I only wanted to make clear, that the impact would be > significant. Lot of parties would be involved with nonequivalent > starting positions. > > I agree with you. I believe nonequivalent starting positions are the norm in mining, not the exception and hence don't believe this to be a problem. > > I think the ASICBoost can and should be prevented completely. > It certainly can be and from the responses I'm getting, I believe there would be at least a few people that would enthusiastically support a BIP to do that. That is, however, a separate issue than my proposal. My proposal aims to bring ASICBoost out into the open *while it is still possible*. A BIP to prevent ASICBoost completely is in that sense compatible. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170408/06fbf04c/attachment.html>