It comes down to economics. If there was a randomx coin that became more valuable then bitcoin the hardware would follow. It might be slightly more difficult than straight sha256, but if there’s money to be made by having a huge advantage then of course ASICS would be built.
Discussion
This reminds me of a question I asked on the bitcoin stack exchange in 2014 😅
Some more replies there:
https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/20364/asics-and-large-memory-requirements
Cant believe that was 9 years ago. I feel old …
It’s good to keep asking these questions though :-)
Interesting read ta. It would be a risky endeavor to invest in building an ASIC if you knew the intention of the developers is to be ASIC resistant and could amend the algorithm (although appreciate that would mean frequent hard-forks).
yup, that probably contributes more to asic resistance than the actual algorithm which wouldn’t even really matter at that point. It would also probably also kill the economics because coins that hardfork go to 0 a lot quicker, not to mention all shitcoins go to 0 eventually.
I’m assuming that such changes to the algorithm would result in a change in the consensus rules and therefore would necessarily be a hard fork, is that correct?