The next retarget would take a year and endless discussions. Poppcorn Second, I like proof of stake. We need it and we will see it at some point. The earlier we start the transition the better.
Topic: A Public Plea to Bitcoin Developers and Supporters alike - page 5. (Read 10866 times)
First, I see a threat in monopoly. Imagine a 20x more effective hardware coming out reaching all the miners in storm pushing the difficulty to 200TH only to turn out to have a kill switch. Right after reaching block #XYZ they all fail. That would be fun The next retarget would take a year and endless discussions. Poppcorn
Second, I like proof of stake. We need it and we will see it at some point. The earlier we start the transition the better.
The next retarget would take a year and endless discussions. Poppcorn Second, I like proof of stake. We need it and we will see it at some point. The earlier we start the transition the better.
No one is preventing you to defend yourself against their "violence" and fork the chain. No one. And that's freedom.
And if they are stupid enough to destroy the trust in Bitcoin through keeping their technology to themselves and acquiring more than 51%, they'll not only destroy the value of their investment but they'll also trigger a response by everyone else changing the protocol and forking the chain as self defense.
And again, that's freedom, the best possible social and economic foundational principle for maximum peace and prosperity known to man.
And if they are stupid enough to destroy the trust in Bitcoin through keeping their technology to themselves and acquiring more than 51%, they'll not only destroy the value of their investment but they'll also trigger a response by everyone else changing the protocol and forking the chain as self defense.
And again, that's freedom, the best possible social and economic foundational principle for maximum peace and prosperity known to man.
^^^^
Then it is true that "true freedom" is based on direct violence or assumed violence. In a world of freedom with the above world, only the strong and powerful prosper. Now you may cut too, "this is reality, get over it" Yes, and I will but denigrating me for saying what I said, it a pretty weak argument. FYI: Violence can be done in business as well.
Bitcoin is a decentralized p2p cryptographic currency. What we are dealing with is a centralization issue. In our system, this becomes a problem. What I care about is keeping the network robust, if our networks end up in a few hands, those make easy points of attack. I just want more communication and guidance from BFL for the networks sake. I am a customer and will be purchasing ASIC as well as we upgrade.
Then it is true that "true freedom" is based on direct violence or assumed violence. In a world of freedom with the above world, only the strong and powerful prosper. Now you may cut too, "this is reality, get over it" Yes, and I will but denigrating me for saying what I said, it a pretty weak argument. FYI: Violence can be done in business as well.
Bitcoin is a decentralized p2p cryptographic currency. What we are dealing with is a centralization issue. In our system, this becomes a problem. What I care about is keeping the network robust, if our networks end up in a few hands, those make easy points of attack. I just want more communication and guidance from BFL for the networks sake. I am a customer and will be purchasing ASIC as well as we upgrade.
In essence the ONLY reason to change the algorithm is if there is a security problem with it, which at the moment there is not.
The only problem with this line of thinking is that when you do have a problem, it will be too late. I am looking for more formal guidance from BFL and maybe some added information on what there intentions are long-term. They have to understand politics do play apart in this because so many peoples hard work and investment is tied to Bitcoin so they have a RESPONSIBILITY to understand the fortunate position and power they weld.
If they disagree or anyone on here responds with, "they can do whatever they want", in my opinion, don't really believe in Bitcoin for its important place in history and are really just in it to profiteer. In any case, thats what we already have in the world around us, but here we "could" actually try and work together to change things so we help not only the big players grow, but the small one too so we have a robust network and people we have a pleasure to work with. Maybe it is idealistic, but I don't think this bar is set too high.
I want to build something that will be here after I am not and is in a better shape than I left it
.02 BTC
Dalkore
I find your presumptive tone deploring. As if it weren't for BFL somehow Bitcoin or any businesses related to it are guaranteed to succeed. Well guess what, they're not. There are no guarantees, not in life and not in Bitcoin.
They have 0, YES ZERO, responsibility with their fortunate position. They can do what ever the hell they want, that's real freedom, anything else is you trying to impose your arbitrarily presumed authority upon them and you should be ashamed for even suggesting something with even a hint of that. And yeah, freedom is scary, you must rely on other people without the option to force them to do as you'd wish in order to experience a preferred outcome, that's what real freedom is. Or are you in favor of masters and slaves where you'd like to be a master and just tell everyone how things are going to work? Is that it?
They can well damn do what ever the hell they like. But if they are smart, they'll sell their product and offer it to the market and not acquire more than ~40% of hashing power to maximize the profits of the situation they themselves have put themselves in (that's right, you're also wrong saying they somehow magically found themselves in that position).
The only danger is in the beginning and BFL can address that situation. In the beginning, one entity could buy up 51% for about 600,000. If BFL does not allow one person to buy that many at once... or even just staggers delivery to known different buyers there is really not a big problem.
Don't worry if there is one thing BFL is good at it is not delivery enough product to make a difference. I am still waiting on my single from over two months ago.
Quote
1) BitForce SC Jalapeno: a USB powered coffee warmer providing 3.5 GH/s, priced at under $149
2) BitForce SC Single: a standalone unit providing roughly 40 GH/s, priced at $1,299
3) BitForce SC Mini Rig: a case & rack mount server providing 1 TH/s, priced at $29,899
2) BitForce SC Single: a standalone unit providing roughly 40 GH/s, priced at $1,299
3) BitForce SC Mini Rig: a case & rack mount server providing 1 TH/s, priced at $29,899
$150 for 3.5 GH/s ? .......this will surely be the downfall of Bitcoin as we know it.
Love me or hate me,
bitlane.
The only danger is in the beginning and BFL can address that situation. In the beginning, one entity could buy up 51% for about 600,000. If BFL does not allow one person to buy that many at once... or even just staggers delivery to known different buyers there is really not a big problem.
This is the free market, and the buyers will be taking a bunch of risks. One is that they spend $30,000 and the protocol changes in such a way that they can not keep up. Even buyers of the current FPGA single probably do not fact that problem as it is more programmable.
Video card miners can sell their cards. People who keep boxes and keep items in good condition could get more then 50% or more of what they paid for their cards. They are not doing so bad!
Think of it this way, right now bitcoin is subsidizing the power industry, who does not give back to the bitcoin community. With bitforce SC products the money is going into the community instead of the power industry.
In essence the ONLY reason to change the algorithm is if there is a security problem with it, which at the moment there is not.
The only problem with this line of thinking is that when you do have a problem, it will be too late. I am looking for more formal guidance from BFL and maybe some added information on what there intentions are long-term. They have to understand politics do play apart in this because so many peoples hard work and investment is tied to Bitcoin so they have a RESPONSIBILITY to understand the fortunate position and power they weld.
If they disagree or anyone on here responds with, "they can do whatever they want", in my opinion, don't really believe in Bitcoin for its important place in history and are really just in it to profiteer. In any case, thats what we already have in the world around us, but here we "could" actually try and work together to change things so we help not only the big players grow, but the small one too so we have a robust network and people we have a pleasure to work with. Maybe it is idealistic, but I don't think this bar is set too high.
I want to build something that will be here after I am not and is in a better shape than I left it
.02 BTC
Dalkore
Stop mining (when you are forced to) and take that passion and drive and build something (anything) which makes Bitcoin better. I am no longer expanding my farm, and eventually will be forced to turn it off and guess what ... I have never been more exciting about Bitcoin. Cellcoin is a fun and exciting project. Maybe it won't go anywhere but I am having fun USING Bitcoin to create value.
I hate to break it to you but your mom, and non techy friends, and small business owner couldn't give two rats farts about what makes Bitcoin secure. They only care that it IS secure, has value, and they can make/save money using it. The last element has been sorely neglected. Be part of the solution to fix that.
+1000000
The only thing keeping mining alive right now is subsidy. If there is no widespread adoption then tx fees will not be sufficient to keep mining incentivized. Not a good situation.
Concerned about mining gear depreciation and infinite ROI brought on by proprietary ASICs and crazy high difficulty? There is a reasonable solution.
Show your support for open, community developed ASIC where profit margins would be negligible. Infinite ROI would be primarily attributed to hefty profit margins in the face of plummeting returns as difficulty goes way, way up.
Really, ASICs are a good thing, but not at 10x cost of production.
It would be insane for ASIC producers to hoard all the chips for themselves and use them on the network directly because of the trust erosion it would cause for Bitcoin. No one can be allowed to have the power of a 51% attack and any business minded entity will voluntarily skip that route. It's gargantually more profitable to sell those chips so that they're distributed. So I wouldn't really worry about this in any case.
+1. Bitcoin as a concept is unstable until we get to current technological edge (which is ASICs); ie, until no further effort requiring only a few $million can meaningfully influence hashing power. Once there are a bunch of big ASIC farms, we'll be at that point. Before then, some malevolent entity *can* theoretically build a 51% attack for sub-$10M (via ASICs). Having ASIC mining actually distributed, even if just a dozen big farms or so, will be a good thing.
The real point at which the bitcoin community can breathe a little easier is when hashing power is sufficiently large so that a government can't launch a 51% attack. Though that'll be a while - a few $B buys a lot of hashing...
should things really get ugly we can simply fork and have a majority vote.
This. If you don't like what they do, compete with them.
To me one of the big advantages of the current economy around Bitcoin is that it is the only thing I know even closely resembling a free market. Did I say I love free markets?
I also agree with this. With the invention of the Internet and p2p networks and now finally Bitcoin, a free market works more and more efficiently. The future is of the free markets because information moves freely and efficiently and now money moves freely and efficiently as well. Also the barriers of entry to new markets that use these technologies are so small that it also helps and keeps the markets competitive. To me one of the big advantages of the current economy around Bitcoin is that it is the only thing I know even closely resembling a free market. Did I say I love free markets?
Personally, I encourage all hardware developers to be as awesome as BFL. OP's complaint basically boils down to "those guys are too good, and the community should prevent them from being successful."
I welcome BFL's announcement and can't wait to buy some of the new hardware.
Any monopoly earned through virtue and brilliant achievement is legitimate. If nobody can compete with BFL, then so be it.
I welcome BFL's announcement and can't wait to buy some of the new hardware.
Any monopoly earned through virtue and brilliant achievement is legitimate. If nobody can compete with BFL, then so be it.
This. If you don't like what they do, compete with them.
To me one of the big advantages of the current economy around Bitcoin is that it is the only thing I know even closely resembling a free market. Did I say I love free markets?
BFL could truly be evil and keep all of their technology for themselves and not sell it to the general public. Instead, they are "nice" and sell their technology to anyone who wishes to mine. They could easily, easily, take over the network and hold 99% of the remaining bitcoins to be mined. Yet, they have decided to sell their equipment to everyone.
I don't think that praising them for making sound business decisions leads to the conclusion that they are good instead of evil. Hoarding the chips just doesn't make sense because even though you would get all the bitcoins you'd cause a serious trust erosion which would lead to at least a crash of the value of bitcoins, possibly even total failure of the whole concept.The money needed to fund these sorts of things doesn't come from thin air, the investors behind it are making sound business decisions. If they were "evil" they would most likely not get the backing or if they did, then there would be something wrong. With Bitcoin a mining monopoly is not just a bad thing, it's potentially catastrophic. Most Bitcoin users and most likely the biggest holders of bitcoins love this currency for what it is and a single entity having the power to shut down the network at any time is not part of that.
So I would rephrase that selling and distributing those chips is them not being total idiots, it has nothing to do with them being good or bad. Although obviously they are more good than bad and gain respect by doing this. Simply because they do have the power to make different choices but they choose wisely.
Personally, I encourage all hardware developers to be as awesome as BFL. OP's complaint basically boils down to "those guys are too good, and the community should prevent them from being successful."
I welcome BFL's announcement and can't wait to buy some of the new hardware.
Any monopoly earned through virtue and brilliant achievement is legitimate. If nobody can compete with BFL, then so be it.
The monopoly is good, the business practices are not. I welcome BFL's announcement and can't wait to buy some of the new hardware.
Any monopoly earned through virtue and brilliant achievement is legitimate. If nobody can compete with BFL, then so be it.
BFL could truly be evil and keep all of their technology for themselves and not sell it to the general public. Instead, they are "nice" and sell their technology to anyone who wishes to mine. They could easily, easily, take over the network and hold 99% of the remaining bitcoins in existence. Yet, they have decided to sell their equipment to everyone.
Personally, I encourage all hardware developers to be as awesome as BFL. OP's complaint basically boils down to "those guys are too good, and the community should prevent them from being successful."
I welcome BFL's announcement and can't wait to buy some of the new hardware.
Any monopoly earned through virtue and brilliant achievement is legitimate. If nobody can compete with BFL, then so be it.
The monopoly is good, the business practices are not. I welcome BFL's announcement and can't wait to buy some of the new hardware.
Any monopoly earned through virtue and brilliant achievement is legitimate. If nobody can compete with BFL, then so be it.
BFL could truly be evil and keep all of their technology for themselves and not sell it to the general public. Instead, they are "nice" and sell their technology to anyone who wishes to mine. They could easily, easily, take over the network and hold 99% of the remaining bitcoins in existence. Yet, they have decided to sell their equipment to everyone.
Personally, I encourage all hardware developers to be as awesome as BFL. OP's complaint basically boils down to "those guys are too good, and the community should prevent them from being successful."
I welcome BFL's announcement and can't wait to buy some of the new hardware.
Any monopoly earned through virtue and brilliant achievement is legitimate. If nobody can compete with BFL, then so be it.
The monopoly is good, the business practices are not. I welcome BFL's announcement and can't wait to buy some of the new hardware.
Any monopoly earned through virtue and brilliant achievement is legitimate. If nobody can compete with BFL, then so be it.
BFL could truly be evil and keep all of their technology for themselves and not sell it to the general public. Instead, they are "nice" and sell their technology to anyone who wishes to mine. They could easily, easily, take over the network and hold 99% of the remaining bitcoins to be mined. Yet, they have decided to sell their equipment to everyone.
Personally, I encourage all hardware developers to be as awesome as BFL. OP's complaint basically boils down to "those guys are too good, and the community should prevent them from being successful."
I welcome BFL's announcement and can't wait to buy some of the new hardware.
Any monopoly earned through virtue and brilliant achievement is legitimate. If nobody can compete with BFL, then so be it.
The monopoly is good, the business practices are not. I welcome BFL's announcement and can't wait to buy some of the new hardware.
Any monopoly earned through virtue and brilliant achievement is legitimate. If nobody can compete with BFL, then so be it.
Personally, I encourage all hardware developers to be as awesome as BFL. OP's complaint basically boils down to "those guys are too good, and the community should prevent them from being successful."
I welcome BFL's announcement and can't wait to buy some of the new hardware.
Any monopoly earned through virtue and brilliant achievement is legitimate. If nobody can compete with BFL, then so be it.
I welcome BFL's announcement and can't wait to buy some of the new hardware.
Any monopoly earned through virtue and brilliant achievement is legitimate. If nobody can compete with BFL, then so be it.
So smart to see so little. How are changes to the protocol made? They are voted on by the miners. It only takes a few THash miners to drive the difficulty so high everybody else gets squeezed out. So when a few control a majority of the network, it will be they that decide what BIPs get approved or not. And when those few miners decide they want 3% of every transaction there won't be a damn thing you can do about it. So much for a decentralized currency. This was your last chance to keep Bitcoin in the hands of the people, because once those ASICs start rolling out it will be too late. Hopefully Bitcoin 2.0 will address this issue (amongst others).
Wrong.
Those who run the full client but do not mine have just as much say in which BIPs are adopted and which aren't. If miners alter the protocol in anyway that isn't backwards compatible everyone else will reject their blocks and the chain will get forked.
I suggest you learn how the protocol works before you make baseless and false comments.
Their stats, and prices is just FUD, a game to stop other companies starting up..
And it is not working.
Jump to: