If the attacker has a single timelord, the amount of storage required for the attack is directly correlated to the speed of the attacker’s timelord relative to the speed of the fastest honest timelord on the network.
For example (ceteris paribus), if the attacker’s timelord is twice as fast as the fastest honest timelord on the network, then the attacker’s space will be twice as “valuable.”
Additionally, the double-dip advantage will increase as the timelord’s speed increases. However, due to the minimum block requirement, this advantage will hit its maximum limit with a timelord that is somewhat less than twice as fast as the fastest honest timelord on the network. Also, multiple timelords are required to gain any double-dip advantage at all.
I am not sure, whether that is a true statement. You are comparing a truck to a compact car. Of course, ASIC miners draw more power but produce more results per Watts consumed. Otherwise, no one would bother.
My statement is still true. asics are purpose built for 1 coin configuration. they are all at 220 volts and require extra energy to keep them cool. your statement is correct as they maximize payouts but atthe cost of high watts use. i have looked into them and decided not to invest at this time as they are bieng blocked by many coins miners and availability is unstable at best due to high demand overseas.
Again, you are comparing a 10TB farm having 10 1TB drives with a 1PB farm having 18 TB drives. The total cost of the 1PB farm is higher, and the rewards per wats are higher. I really don’t see your point beside "I like the smaller one.’
I recommend to do some research what ASICs are before coming up with such claims. A Bitcoin miner is an ASIC, but it doesn’t mean all ASICs are Bitcoin miners optimized to do as much as possible useless work in a given time frame.
Just to clarify, ASICs are always done to optimize some tasks regardless of whether it is optimization for speed, power usage, or something else. The total power consumption will depend on a given task (e.g., for coin miners “mining density” is the primary optimization, and for some proprietary devices it could be optimization for low power, as speed may be the secondary issue (e.g., heart pacemakers)).
i never stated that, my pouint was simple. not a green form of mining. everyone has taken taht to places not meant for conversation. i guess people just like to argue point. not LOL.
You are wrong again. The reason those miners are using 240V is because PSUs are more efficient and less expensive at higher voltages. Therefore, that S9 miner will be less efficient / green when running 110V.
1the message about voltage comes a statement from a top asic seller here in the USA, and yes i google it. dont pretend to be nowing wit faxt that i can see. i can share where this comes from, thoiugh i dont owe you anything.
all that is true. when price is high profit are generated. a ttypical comonly sold asic generates 6 usd at price over 45k for bitcoin based on graphs shared by selling companies selling used asic units. again my point was simply they are not green.
maybe i was not clear: all miners work on 110v. its the power supplies you mate to this equipment that is dependent on delivered power.
most server grade ps are 220v but use that power in a more efficient manner.
consumer grade power supplies are usually dual mode (110v-240v) set to 110v out of the box and vary in quality but you can find a good one and it will be much less noisy than the commercial grade server units.
wanted to be clear.
Do you understand the role ASICs will play in the Chia ecosystem? Because it doesn’t seem like you do. Do you understand that there is no mechanism for a timelord ASIC to earn rewards? Do you understand how Chia plotting and farming works?
Since mainnet launch, the Chia team has been planning of rolling out a TimeLord ASIC. It is simply an application specific integreated circuit board intending to run the timelord function as fast as computationally possible so that no one can gain advantage by having a faster timelord since the asic version will be fastest one possible and there will be many. Hence why it makes network more secure. But timelords don’t earn chia, anyone running timelords is doing so to support chia in some way other than for farming rewards. TimeLords don’t earn farming rewards or any chia, therefore an ASIC timelord would still not make farming rewards or chia, therefore they have no effect on farmers running hard drives since the ASIC does not compete with farmers. Each is running a different function and only farmers get block rewards.
Now IF k32 plot times can be reduced to under 30 secs (read the attack vector page posted by Gene), then the function of creating the next block challenge and then pumping out a plot for it could be turned into an ASIC, but that is not what the Chia team is referring to when talking about creating an asic.
I also thought that it is the case, but if you read that document (“short range replotting attack” section), maybe not.
The assumption to make it work this way is that based on the initial challenge you can predict which plot to generate. However, the initial challenge is just a filter for 512 plots. Therefore, you may need to produce 512 plots during those 30 seconds. So that is still far away from any ASICs capabilities (I think).
The problem with this attack is not really whether Chia will generate such ASIC, but rather whether it is feasible, as it may break the blockchain.
