Cross post from https://gitter.im/ethereum/governance
“I care about rational arguments.”
“Phil Daian’s essay is rather convincing. It would have been more useful before January.”
This seems sort of comical. Sorry to single you out @gcolvin, but here you’re basically admitting to not caring about rational arguments and excusing yourself for making the decision without considering them.
Much rational. Such logic.
As for @mhswende’s arguments (https://swende.se/blog/Progpow.html):
Community. As far as I’ve seen, most signals point to ‘the community’ wanting to go ahead with progpow.
This is the signaling argument you don’t like, right? Also our discussion over the last week points to more contention than I most ProgPow proponents expected. Most of us didn’t even realize that the ProgPow decision had “been made” back in January.
Known “evils”. If we switch to progpow, we will keep the ‘same’ ecosystem of miners around.
Who cares? The GPU miners will have their issuance reduced in the coming year anyways as PoS starts to provide finality for the PoW chain.
In my view, a hardfork which updates ethash-hashimoto to ethash-progpow will be the simplest fork we have ever done.
If this was really the case, then why is there so much fuss about getting an audit done? Either it’ll be trivial, and we should do it, or it won’t be trivial, and we should definitely do it.
Ethereum has historically been aimed to be ASIC-resistant… to me, this means that the ‘conservative’ route forward is to keep this model. And conversely, if we are to change this model, then the burden of proof for why we should change this model is on the progpow opponents.
Yea, we should allow ASICs temporarily because:
We’re well on our way to PoS securing the PoW chain, so the ROI on this change is negative for the community (due to coordination cost), and only positive for GPU miners. The ASICs will lose their relevancy over the next 1-2 years.
ASICs do not represent an existential risk at this time, and I don’t understand the fear that ProgPow proponents have of ASIC manufacturers trying to impede PoS. Like, let’s say we start to see more miner centralization, and then they attack the PoS transition by not going along with the fork… who in their right mind would want be on the centralized miner chain instead of the PoS chain, or at least the PoW chain secured by PoS in the meantime?