<div dir="ltr">I think you're misreading Luv. He's defending the idea of blocking covert ASICBOOST, not defending ASICBOOST.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 11:16 AM Jorge Timón via bitcoin-dev <<a href="mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 2:30 PM, Luv Khemani via bitcoin-dev<br class="gmail_msg">
<<a href="mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<br class="gmail_msg">
><br class="gmail_msg">
> Just to add on to the ethical issue of blocking this.<br class="gmail_msg">
><br class="gmail_msg">
><br class="gmail_msg">
> If blocking the covert form of ASICBOOST is seen as unethical, then the same can be said about libsecp256k1, various client optimisations, Compactblocks.<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
This is simply a non sequitur. These optimizations benefit users. On<br class="gmail_msg">
the other hand, asicboost doesn't benefit users in any way, it only<br class="gmail_msg">
benefits some miners if and only if not all miners use it. It<br class="gmail_msg">
obviously harms the miners that aren't using it by making them less<br class="gmail_msg">
profitable (maybe to the point that they lose money).<br class="gmail_msg">
If all miners use it or if no one of them uses it is equivalent from<br class="gmail_msg">
the point of view of the user. In fact, the very fact of allowing it<br class="gmail_msg">
makes the network less secure unless every single honest miner uses<br class="gmail_msg">
it, for an attacker could use it against the network.<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
Even if asicboost was good for users in any way (which as explained<br class="gmail_msg">
isn't), this proposal doesn't disable it, only the covert form that<br class="gmail_msg">
cannot be proven to be used.<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
Therefore there's no rational arguments to oppose this proposal unless<br class="gmail_msg">
you are (or are invested in):<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
A) A Miner currently using the covert form of asicboost.<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
B) A Miner planning to use the covert form of asicboost soon.<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
C) An attacker using or planning to use the covert form of asicboost.<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
> All of which seek to reduce the efficacy of large miners and selfish mining.<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
Asicboost doesn't seek this and doesn't help with this in any way.<br class="gmail_msg">
_______________________________________________<br class="gmail_msg">
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br class="gmail_msg">
<a href="mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br class="gmail_msg">
<a href="https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" rel="noreferrer" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br class="gmail_msg">
</blockquote></div></div>