4 ms·

I submitted this because I wanted to see it discussed in this light. I think the author makes some good points but others are just plain wrong. For example, whe

by gbl08ma 13y ago

I submitted this because I wanted to see it discussed in this light. I think the author makes some good points but others are just plain wrong. For example, when it is said that Litecoin and other Scrypt-based coins were created just as a way not to let GPU mining rigs go worthless: I believe the existence of other coins with different algorithms is important, even to point out possible flaws in Bitcoin and the way SHA-256 is used. Altcoins, among other things, provide a way for testing (sometimes crazy) ideas that can't be tested on Bitcoin at this stage, and allow for more choices to be given to the user (in the same way Linux is not the only open source kernel, GNU GPL is not the only open source license, etc.). If you think of Bitcoin as just another open source project, and consider "altcoins" to be forks, you'll find forks that are basically just copies of the main project with some values adjusted to the will of the creator, and you'll find more elaborate forks that actually add something new (even if these additions prove to be inadequate to merge into the main project at some point). The second type of forks is, in my opinion, very desirable, while the first one is pretty much useless and, sometimes, is nothing more than a pump-and-dump scheme.

nwh 13y ago
> For example, when it is said that Litecoin and other Scrypt-based coins were created just as a way not to let GPU mining rigs go worthless This is incorrect. Litecoin was created to stop CPUs going idle, it was a resistance against GPU mining. They since changed their tune a bit, but that was the stated aim on their main page for a year or so. > I believe the existence of other coins with different algorithms is important, even to point out possible flaws in Bitcoin and the way SHA-256 is used. If sha256 is broken so badly that arbitrary outputs can be chosen, all things are dead. Litecoin uses sha256 everywhere internally too, just not for their mining algorithm.
- gbl08ma 13y ago
  > This is incorrect. I didn't say that was correct, I was just saying that's what the article (incorrectly, in my opinion) appears to say. I'm not sure who's misunderstanding who... > If sha256 is broken so badly that arbitrary outputs can be chosen It's not about sha256 being broken or not, but about the way it is being used for mining (being used incorrectly != broken hashing algo). Even though I agree, if it was being used improperly we would have noticed by now - I could have chosen a better example.
  - nwh 13y ago
    > "Litecoin uses Scrypt as a proof-of-work scheme. Scrypt uses the low-latency cache memory of modern processors to provide greater hash-speeds on CPUs in comparison to GPUs. We would like to extend our thanks to ArtForz for the implementation." https://web.archive.org/web/20111128074850/http://litecoin.org/ https://web.archive.org/web/20111128074850/http://litecoin.o...
  - maaku 13y ago
    > It's not about sha256 being broken or not, but about the way it is being used for mining (being used incorrectly != broken hashing algo). Even though I agree, if it was being used improperly we would have noticed by now - I could have chosen a better example. It's being used absolutely correctly for mining. Proof of work needs to be extremely easy to validate. You want the fastest hash possible, not the slowest.
wmf 13y ago
I believe the existence of other coins with different algorithms is important, even to point out possible flaws in Bitcoin and the way SHA-256 is used. But Litecoin hasn't pointed out any flaws in Bitcoin, so it's pointless in that respect. It even introduced new flaws like claiming to be GPU-hard even though it wasn't. Also, when a flaw in Bitcoin is discovered, attempting to fork the Bitcoin economy by deploying an altcoin is a very expensive and disruptive way to fix it. But it's par for the course in a world where you disclose security holes by stealing people's money.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- synchronise 13y ago
  >It even introduced new flaws like claiming to be GPU-hard even though it wasn't. You think that's a flaw? It's a claim you idiot, and it was bound to happen, just as PoW in Bitmessage was moved to the GPU by spammers so they could flood the network. I can't think of one alt coin that hasn't been mined by GPUs

by gbl08ma 13y ago

nwh 13y ago

> For example, when it is said that Litecoin and other Scrypt-based coins were created just as a way not to let GPU mining rigs go worthless This is incorrect. Litecoin was created to stop CPUs going idle, it was a resistance against GPU mining. They since changed their tune a bit, but that was the stated aim on their main page for a year or so. > I believe the existence of other coins with different algorithms is important, even to point out possible flaws in Bitcoin and the way SHA-256 is used. If sha256 is broken so badly that arbitrary outputs can be chosen, all things are dead. Litecoin uses sha256 everywhere internally too, just not for their mining algorithm.

gbl08ma 13y ago
> This is incorrect. I didn't say that was correct, I was just saying that's what the article (incorrectly, in my opinion) appears to say. I'm not sure who's misunderstanding who... > If sha256 is broken so badly that arbitrary outputs can be chosen It's not about sha256 being broken or not, but about the way it is being used for mining (being used incorrectly != broken hashing algo). Even though I agree, if it was being used improperly we would have noticed by now - I could have chosen a better example.
- nwh 13y ago
  > "Litecoin uses Scrypt as a proof-of-work scheme. Scrypt uses the low-latency cache memory of modern processors to provide greater hash-speeds on CPUs in comparison to GPUs. We would like to extend our thanks to ArtForz for the implementation." https://web.archive.org/web/20111128074850/http://litecoin.org/ https://web.archive.org/web/20111128074850/http://litecoin.o...
- maaku 13y ago
  > It's not about sha256 being broken or not, but about the way it is being used for mining (being used incorrectly != broken hashing algo). Even though I agree, if it was being used improperly we would have noticed by now - I could have chosen a better example. It's being used absolutely correctly for mining. Proof of work needs to be extremely easy to validate. You want the fastest hash possible, not the slowest.

wmf 13y ago

I believe the existence of other coins with different algorithms is important, even to point out possible flaws in Bitcoin and the way SHA-256 is used. But Litecoin hasn't pointed out any flaws in Bitcoin, so it's pointless in that respect. It even introduced new flaws like claiming to be GPU-hard even though it wasn't. Also, when a flaw in Bitcoin is discovered, attempting to fork the Bitcoin economy by deploying an altcoin is a very expensive and disruptive way to fix it. But it's par for the course in a world where you disclose security holes by stealing people's money.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
synchronise 13y ago
>It even introduced new flaws like claiming to be GPU-hard even though it wasn't. You think that's a flaw? It's a claim you idiot, and it was bound to happen, just as PoW in Bitmessage was moved to the GPU by spammers so they could flood the network. I can't think of one alt coin that hasn't been mined by GPUs