Is the Ethereum Community Ready for ASICs?

On December 15th, Beijing time, developers in the Ethereum Magician forum discussed the issue of ASIC again. Discussions on ASIC have been held many times before. After August this year, due to the continuous attacks on the ETC network, developers have discussed it again. Although ASIC has not brought a decisive impact on Ethereum mining, due to the proportion of ASIC computing power, the decentralization of GPU and the centralization of ASIC are always in opposition. In addition, the changes in the computing power of the network and the possibility of migration are also key factors in the discussion.

The following is an edited version of the discussion:

CryptoBlockchainTech, August 9:

What does the community think about what the $5 million ETC 51% attack means for Ethereum? Was this a test and a way for someone to get enough funds to attack Ethereum? Even if the attacker had no plans to attack Ethereum, the execution method has been made public and can be used by the next attacker.

We already know that Ethereum mining is very close to centralization, as ASICs now control over 45% of the hash. 6% more rent, that's billions! As we get closer to POS, we don't want an attack like this to happen in a last-ditch effort to steal as much ETH as possible before the POW lights go out.

When the 4GB dag size arrives later this year, serious consideration needs to be given to scheduling for the algorithm change, until more powerful ASICs are released, this is the best time to switch.

Because it becomes more vulnerable to 51% attacks every day as ASIC manufacturers gain more control of the network? Using GPUs to return mining to millions of gamers around the world is the safest way to ensure POW decentralization until POS is ready.

elliot_olds, August 16:

Does the ETC attack at all demonstrate the need to make algorithms more GPU-friendly, thereby helping to avoid attacks?

The ETC attack was not launched by normal ETC miners, but rented hashes. Using a more GPU-friendly algorithm, the attacker can still rent hashes.

Typically, the GPU capacity available for rent will be higher than the ASIC capacity available for rent because there are too many GPUs on the rental market. This attack occurred because the mining rewards for ETC were low, and the attacker noticed that the required transaction confirmation time was unbalanced compared to the cost of renting hashing power on ETC.

Lirazsiri:

It is very possible that the proceeds from the ETC 51% attack were used to fund a massive attack on Ethereum.

elliot_olds:

This seems unlikely to me, as the ETC attack seems to be a crime of opportunity caused by extremely low ETC mining rewards. Are you interested in betting on whether a similar attack will happen in ETH before the end of the year?

Timolson:

ASIC miners have to pay a heavy price to successfully mine their own blockchain. If anything, it is GPU-powered PoW that is subject to this "rent attack". GPU miners can switch coins at will, and if they don't mine, the hardware is still valuable. There is no "defection as the last step of the prisoner's dilemma" for ASICs, only GPU-mined PoW does.

Lirazsiri, October 28:

I suspect most people who favor GPUs just want to mine for “free money” at home and don’t actually care about the security of the coins.

gcolvin:

I suspect you are wrong.

CryptoBlockchainTech:

I also suspect you are wrong. As a GPU Ethereum miner for over 3 years, I have staked 1/2 of my earned tokens into Ethereum 2.0 so I can continue to support network security on both chains.

Over the past 3 years I have been willing to risk 1/2 of my earned tokens for projects I am interested in. If you think mining is free money, you are wrong.

Like anything worth achieving in life, it takes hard work, long-term planning, and a solid business plan. The intrusion of ASICs on the network over the past three years has caused problems for our business model, as we could avoid some of the things promised in the Yellow Paper.

If anything, the GPU mining community’s inability to make an algorithm change only shows that years of substandard profitability is a real weakness in the community. If you think this is safer, you are mistaken again.

Timolson, December 2:

I also mine at scale. My argument is that GPUs are pointed at whatever coin is currently making money and they don't really care about the community. This has been a huge problem for smaller coins, however, ASIC miners have to care about the health and community of their coin because they don't have the option to switch to another coin. ASIC miners are locked in. They are monogamous. GPU miners don't love you, they switch from one coin to another in a week to get the highest profit that week and don't care if it dies.

Gcolvin, December 15:

Ethereum’s security does not depend on miners caring about the security of the network itself. Miners provide a service to the network, and do so in pursuit of profit. ASICs reduce the network’s accessibility to profit seekers.

Likewise, people can mine and get some Ethereum to run dApps without having to buy it on an exchange. Mining with a GPU may not be profitable, but can be done at a reasonable cost in most places in the world. ASICs are likely orders of magnitude more powerful than GPUs, too expensive for most people, and may not be as widely available as GPUs. This is another security that isolates Ethereum from banks and fiat issuers.

CryptoBlockchainTech:

Unlike GPU miners, ASICs must sell everything they mine before the next miner makes their hardware obsolete. ASIC miners have no allegiance to any community or coin. Once their miners are no longer profitable, they will join the next most profitable coin and repurchase new hardware.