No…Bitmain will control more then 51% so they can reverse any transaction if govermant want from them
I guess you do not understand what I was trying to say, If ASICs take over the Zcash network, Your transaction might be at risk of being less anonymous, is that good for the network?
No I cant show you… can you show me bitmain mining zcash? why they will do that when they can mine bitcoin, bitcoin cash and eth for more profit? Also I cant see big jump in zcash difficulty - so nobody mines yet
They will not be able to reverse your transactions for the goverment, that is incorrect. That is not how a block-chain or 51% attack works. Please do some more research on how block-chains work and you will see why.
"An attacker that controls more than 50% of the network’s computing power can, for the time that he is in control, exclude and modify the ordering of transactions. This allows him to: Reverse transactions that he sends while he’s in control. This has the potential to double-spend transactions that previously had already been seen in the block chain. "
The problem is they are already the big player, they mine too, so your competing against the company that sells you the miner. Also, the limit is only temporary with them, it will suddenly change and they will allow bulk orders from big fish…the second that happens you will be hard pressed to get it (and they have a habit of suddenly raising the price). They can do that, they have no competition.
1 Like
Is what you said, and I was just asking for evidence. There is plenty of proof Bitmain is mining “coins”, can I prove its Zcash, no…
They are currently selling a Zcash ASIC, You think they are not mining with them? for you to say other ASIC coins would be more proftiable to mine shows your not understanding how hash rates work.
1 Like
YOU sad you never mind and now you talk like you know everything about mining…i mine for 5 years…Zcash price droped from 700$ to 170$ and hashrate off network stayed the same which is impossible if some powerful more efficient hardware did not come online and that can be only ASIC
If I made a transaction on the network, and the goverment wants to erase it later. It will already be MANY blocks behind on the chain, you cant 51% attack 100s of blocks into the past, that is just not how it works.
I said IF… its a just a theory
Edit: Didn’t want to take the post down, it should stay, but with a nice BIG disclaimer that this video isn’t factual in the case of Shawn.
DISCLAIMER: The Video Cryptomined posted wasn’t entirely factual. Shawn is NOT a member of the ZcashCo, so it really doesn’t matter what he did or did not say.
You know that is not true, there was video evidence showing the before and after edits to @Shawn post made after the post you made on the 3rd. The post was edited to say what you are stating now. There was another post affirming this stance yet again by @Shawn in a direct conversation with @Cryptomined. These posts stood unedited until recently, and then they were suddenly changed. How can you make a post like this knowing full well the community can prove otherwise for certain now??
DISCLAIMER: The Video Cryptomined posted wasn’t entirely factual. Shawn is NOT a member of the ZcashCo, so it really doesn’t matter what he did or did not say.
1 Like
Yes that is reason that ASIC will kill any competition…Bitmain ASIC cost probably 200$ to produce…they sell for 2000$ …so they mine with 200$ while you 2000$+shiping +taxes +waiting…for same hashrate…you see is always a winner a who loser
The reason Zcash dropped in price so much was because ALL alt coins droped 70% if not more. They are all tied to BTC and drop and gain with it. For someone who has mined for 5 years, One would think you would know this stuff by now?
Do I have to mine to know something? Sorry I dont mine… but if you mine for 5 years and claim this - better stop mining 
Just kidding. Stay cool
wait, what? what about zk-snarks and shielded transactions? they cant be messed with.
From: What are zk-SNARKs? | Zcash
How zk-SNARKs are applied to create a shielded transactionIn Bitcoin, transactions are validated by linking the sender address, receiver address, and input and output values on the public blockchain. Zcash uses zk-SNARKs to prove that the conditions for a valid transaction have been satisfied without revealing any crucial information about the addresses or values involved.
WHere did i say why prices droped??? Also bitcoin did not drop as much as Zcash which fall 5 times but difficultly stayed the same…like i sad which is not posibile becase it would mean that no GPY miners went to more profitable coin …and ETH were more profitable for 1070 and 1060 and many other coins…and many people moved to mine ETH but network hash rate stayed the same…
You write so much nonsens all the time that someone can only wonder how you found zcash and are not stuck with nicehash … :-)))
Let me illuminate you on the nature of Bitmain. They personally control 30% of the hashrate on Bitcoin. Chinese miners account for 75% of all bitcoin that is produced…take a guess who’s equipment that is. Someone will probably say it’s QA testing before they release a miner for sale at some point.
That’s some serious QA testing…I wish I could test like that lol:
3 Likes
Hi all. I am nowhere close to catching up on this thread!
I wanted to pop in here to point out that I’ve had multiple discussions with ZcashCo engineers about our POW, ASIC resistance, our users, governance, what Zcash is, and more.
The latest conversation was technical about potential changes to PoW. I don’t think we can reasonably develop a safe change to PoW prior to Sapling activation, and deploying Sapling safely is my primary priority.
Meanwhile, we already wanted to deploy equihash with a different parameter set which would make light-device validation of the block headers more efficient. I don’t know, at this time, if this would render existing Zcash ASIC products to become inefficient. We may try to schedule this in a post-Sapling upgrade anyway, regardless of the ASIC resistance issue.
I also want to voice my support for the “hobby GPU miners” who are into Zcash for Zcash’s sake, and not just because it’s the most profitable thing to mine at any particular moment. I want to keep those folks engaged as best as we can.
Don’t get too attached to GPU miners for Zcash though! If we want healthy decentralization, over the lifetime of Zcash the consensus system is sure to evolve radically. A prime example would be Proof-of-Stake if we became convinced a secure protocol exists that has the right properties.
Another thought I have about ASIC resistance is that there are two modes of thinking: one is about long-term steady state hypotheticals, and the other is about short term transient effects. In my opinion a lot of cryptocurrency design geeks overestimate “long term steady state” and underestimate “transient” effects. For example, a future with ASICS as commodity hardware with competition from multiple vendors and healthily low entrance barriers to that market could be awesome, if we get there. But we may never get there because the “transient” forces are strong and constantly shifting the landscape.
I agree that the short term transient situation is unfortunate when we have a single hardware manufacturer with a more efficient miner. Keep in mind though, we already have other (hopefully short-term transient) centralization problems: development skillset and funding, governance, and mining pool centralization all come to mind.
So I see mining decentralization is one front on multiple ongoing areas where we need to improve decentralization.
19 Likes