[ad_1]
"We're coming back to things we were tired of talking about months ago. We decided that the only problem was to know if there were any errors in the algorithm [or] the back doors of the algorithm. "
That's what Greg Colvin said during a heated debate during a conference call with the ethereum developers on Friday about a project to change the network's operating algorithm called Progressive Proof-of- Work or "ProgPoW".
ProgPow aims to reduce the efficiency of specialized extraction devices called ASICs and to optimize the performance of general-purpose hardware called GPUs. Both types of machines can be deployed on the network from 2018, a development that sparked a controversial debate.
Some think that optimizing the network for GPUs will allow more Ethereum users to compete for the new cryptocurrency awarded by the protocol, while others think that large mining companies are likely to hunt such individuals, regardless of the types of chips capable of meeting the required IT requirements.
Nevertheless, the developers reached an agreement in principle on the code in early January, which prompted Colvin to ask why today the proposal's agenda item had persisted. .
"Nobody objected. Many have accepted. Nobody blocked it. We agreed that we would go ahead unless there were technical problems, "said Colvin.
But investigating these potential "technical problems" is more difficult than expected.
After launching third-party security audits of ProgPoW code, leading developers agreed that a working group consisting of project managers would be responsible for the execution and communication of the results of these audits. However, disagreement over the expected results of the audits delayed this process.
Noting that audits had not yet begun for ProgPoW, Hudson Jameson, Ethereum Foundation Community Relations Officer, noted during the call that the initial project to conduct two separate audits on the proposal was was not going exactly as planned.
"We can not do comparative badysis [audit] at all, because it's the least important part of the two elements of the audit, "explained Jameson.
This second check, added Jameson, would allow for a "ProgPoW stress badysis to examine the badertions about the effectiveness of a ProgPoW ASIC compared to a [GPU], Among other badyzes on the proposed "ASIC architectures" and "economic badysis of the impact that ProgPoW would have on the economics of the Ethereum protocol".
The way to go
Explaining that he had already tried to define the expected results of these audits, the lead developer, Alexey Akhunov, admitted that the process "was very difficult".
"What is the point [of ProgPoW]? What are the criteria for success? For now, I have not managed to extract this information from those who suggest ProgPoW, "said Akhunov.
While the debate on the best way to conduct ProgPow audits is likely to continue outside of today 's call, key developers have reaffirmed that ProgPoW remains an approved proposal for inclusion in the next upcoming upgrade of the ethereum system, Istanbul, or in a separate hard fork that would give Ethereum users the ability to upgrade to software that included it.
Be that as it may, the risk badessors of the new versions of the Ethereum software believe that the implications are the same.
"All [Ethereum Improvement Proposal] that we accept as a difficult fork if it turns out that something horrible is wrong, yes, we will withdraw it. Acceptance will always be conditional, "concluded Martin Holst Swende, Security Manager at Ethereum Foundation.
Image of the extraction device via Shutterstock
Source link
