I'm curious if the development of ASICs generally increases or decreases the security of the network.
It seems to me that the resilience of the network to attack doesn't depend on the total computing power of the network, but on the dollar cost of the total computing power of the network.
If ASIC deployment increases the computing power of the network 10x, but the availability of ASICs reduces the cost per unit of computing power by 11x, I would think it makes the network as a whole less secure.
In other words, the existence of ASICs increases the computing power of the network, but the existence of ASICs also makes it cheaper for an adversary to buy boatloads of targeted computing power to attack the network.
If you're defending against "random wealthy person wants to subvert the network" then I think you're right. You make it cheaper for them at the same time it's cheaper for you. Your defense is adding more people (or at least more money for legitimate mining), not technology.
On the other hand, if you're defending against e.g. the NSA, then they already have the ability to make their own hardware like this, so you're not helping them any further.
It seems to me that the resilience of the network to attack doesn't depend on the total computing power of the network, but on the dollar cost of the total computing power of the network.
If ASIC deployment increases the computing power of the network 10x, but the availability of ASICs reduces the cost per unit of computing power by 11x, I would think it makes the network as a whole less secure.
In other words, the existence of ASICs increases the computing power of the network, but the existence of ASICs also makes it cheaper for an adversary to buy boatloads of targeted computing power to attack the network.