Ah, here is the 'newz'. Sonia wasted $3.8m and is finally ordering enough wafers to make 200 boxes.
I have just set up an instance for this debate here, please suggest claims, vote and requests for participation!
This is not a poll. It is a framework for presenting all the arguments for and against in a way that anyone can review the current state of the debate.
In response to this request from Hudson: https://twitter.com/hudsonjameson/status/1174154313997979648?s=20
From the Least Authority audit, Suggestion 1
Suggestion 1: Scrutinize the Custom Keccak Function
The Keccak function variant in ProgPoW does not use padding. Intuitively, this is a safe change, especially because the hashed data is exactly one Keccak-block long. However, while rounds and the parameters b, c, and r are configurable, the padding used in Keccak is fixed to multi-rate padding. This technically means that the hash is not a Keccak instance.
Professionals with experience researching and investigating Keccak should further explore the hash function.
A deeper look at the custom Keccak function could elicit previously unidentified security risks.
@pmauric, As the founder of Canonizer.com, I recognize I am very biased. However, I’ve found that Kialo is designed to polarize people around ideological divides. Sure, people can weigh in on the validity of various arguments, but what is needed is more information about what it would take to get people to get on board with the consensus (or lack thereof). You need to be able to measure the quality of the arguments and evidence by how many people they convert.
Kialo’s tree structure just polarizes everyone at every branch and completely loses anything anyone agrees on (usually all the most important stuff). In contrast, Canonizer’s tree structure allows you to create super camps containing all the important consensus stuff everyone agrees on. You can push disagreeable stuff down to lower level sub camps out of the way of consensus where you can still keep track of it while focusing on what it would take to convert people to a consensus.
@IfDefElse from twitter regarding Suggestion 1: (https://twitter.com/IfDefElse_/status/1174480889532698624)
We would ask you to first refer to the Keccak specification - listed here: >https://keccak.team/keccak_specs_summary.html
To quote: “The value of the capacity c and of the suffix Mbits jointly provide domain separation between the different instances…”
“The standard instances typically add a few trailing bits for domain separation. When made of bytes, the input of these functions then becomes Mbytes, while Mbits is solely determined by the instance used, see Table 3.”
We do not add any padding, but that in no way has any effect on the cryptographic properties of keccak. Padding exists to make sure different variants don't produce the same results, but we do not ever actually care about the result.