For Hudson Jameson, it is obvious that the community does not agree with ProgPoW. The developer believes that the biggest rejection of ProgPoW arises from how it was approved.
Hudson Jameson, Developer at the Ethereum Foundation, is against the inclusion of the new mining algorithm ProgPoW in an upcoming Ethereum fork. A basis for Jameson’s reasoning is the broad rejection of the decision in the Ethereum community.
Hudson said that he considers the implementation of ProgPoW to be unfeasible. According to him, ProgPoW “is not worth it and is dead” due to the overwhelming evidence of community disagreement.
Jameson summarized the entire history of the proposed mining algorithm in Ethereum, which is expected to be included in a fork planned for next July. Among the details, the developer recalled that much of the community is against ProgPoW. In that sense, more than 90 participants of the Ethereum ecosystem introduced a signed letter in GitHub.
On the other hand, the developer expressed his regret on the tone reached by the discussion on this issue among members of the community. In this regard, he said that he had contacted people that had been directly harassed due to this debate. He said that it was “unacceptable” to reach such an extent, which requires having a “civil” and productive discussion.
Jameson also referred to the difference between the current situation and the analysis of the sentiments around ProgPoW made in 2019. While the majority trend at that time was towards accepting the new mining algorithm, currently the community does not express the same sentiments.
The letter signed by community members in recent days stated that it was too late to implement ProgPoW, considering that Ethereum version 2.0 will use the Proof of Stake (PoS) mechanism for the network’s mining process.
Controversy Still Continues around ProgPoW
After the new algorithm was proposed, the Ethereum community has been involved in a constant controversy concerning whether or not to implement ProgPoW. Even though the debate surrounding this proposal is already two years old, there is still no clear consensus on this.
Despite the disagreements, there was an intention to conduct independent audits of the code. Despite much disagreement, the resources for an audit were finally approved.
In September 2019, the results of the audit showed a good performance to mitigate the advantages of ASIC specialized mining equipment concerning miners, which is precisely the key reason why ProgPoW was proposed. The study also left a balance of recommendations for technical improvements.
To conclude, Jameson himself also expressed his expectation about the audit. In that regard, he said that the results were expected to allow the community to make a final decision more easily than through the new algorithm. It should be noted that has not happened yet and a new discussion is expected this month.
By Alexander Salazar