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