You keep saying very strange things.
I'm not sure what you would see as strange. I think I've explained my rationale quite clearly. From conversation with others in the community, I don't think that my reasoning is unique.
You ask me in every message to give you my current bot for testing to verify that it is really only 20 times better than public bot.
You misunderstand my intent. I am far less interested in the details of your bot as in quantifying the necessary resource contribution to overcome it. You make one claim that 20 instances of "the public bot" would do, but we have no reason to believe this. Further, this does not align well with statistics collected at the peak of the anti-warp application, which would indicate that it would take 3 to 4 orders of magnitude more instances of the public bot to overcome the peak performance of the dominant bot.
When GPU's hit bitcoin mining it was readily quantifiable what the difference in peak performance was, and how many CPUs it would take to overcome a GPU. Similarly through the progressin of GPU, FPGA, ASIC.
The peak performance of the dominant bot is not readily quantifiable. We have the number you've thrown out, and some estimates based on the anti-warp test, but these indicate some *very* different quantities.
Will you ask every future bot miner to verify their bots capabilities? Will you ask every other public bot miner to give you his PC to verify that they are not 10X better than other's? Why couldn't I give you less productive bot for verification?
No, I would only ask this of a miner who carries out a sustained 51% attack and then tells me to just go ahead and mine against him. Of course I would not begin applying resource at a loss unless I could quantify how much loss would need to be endured before any hope of a return, in order to in turn quantify the length of time before I would be back into the black. Without being able to make such a projection no-one rationally is going to mine.
You tell me that we just can not distribute the hash rate until I release my current bot.
I've said no such thing, though I have said is that releasing your current bot is *one* solution. I've also said that it is the "easiest."
What I have said is that we just can not distribute the hash rate until there is capability for miners to mine competitively. This is simply a truism.
And simultaneosly you tell me that public bot "is nowhere near as capable" as YOUR bot which I presume you had all this time.
Had? Yes. Ran? Not in nearly a year, now.
Why didn't you give YOUR bot to everybody. Wouldn't it help to distribute hash rate? Instead you have disappeared for almost a year without any notice.
I didn't give my bot to everybody because at the time there was no *need* to distribute the hash-rate, as mining was competitive. Multiple bot operators shared hash-rate.
No, my bot will not help to distribute the hash-rate, because it is not competitive. Because it may require thousands of instances for it to be effective against you, no-one will be the first to use it against you. Nobody wants to be the one who will lose money while waiting around for the other thousands of people to come lose money with them so that everyone collectively *might* have a hope to make some money....
All this is complete nonsense. My bot is ONLY 20X better than public. 20 mining people could overproduce me.
Nothing here is nonsense, much the opposite.
"Don't willingly choose to lose an indefinite amount of money, on purpose" is pretty well common sense, I'd think.
We have only your word that your bot is "20X." (Further, this is counter to evidence.)
In fact, we have only your word that the bot is actually "yours" at all. (This is also counter to evidence. I've additionally asked you several times now to prove your claimed domain over the dominant bot, but you have yet to offer up even a small shred of indication.)
Normal coins have thousands of miners. They wouldn't even notice my 20X more powerful bot.
Hrmm, first this is not really true. The largest few coins may have this many miners, but the average alt network has less than 10!
Second, they would notice your "20x more powerful bot" if it represented >50% of the hashing strength, I'm sure.
So I'm not even really sure what you are trying to argue at this point...
Anyone who wants to try public bot can sell their MOTO immidiately if they affraid that network is insecure.
This is more flawed reasoning. Miners know that the network is insecure, and "selling their MOTO immediately" is no help when at any moment you might just decide to stop their coinbase transactions from even existing, prevent their transfers into the exchange, etc. The security problem here begins long before the miners' coins are even "in hand" to be sold.
And decide for their own is this profitable or not. In fact we have some amount of public bot miners (Can they write something?) We just need more of them.
How many more? You claim 20 will do it, but we have no way to know. The evidence that we have would seem to indicate that it could potentially require much much more.
You won't get 1, let alone 20, let alone enough to overcome the bot, unless you can demonstrate that it is feasible at all.
Is there anyone who tried mining with public bot and decided that it is unprofitable?
I've mined with both public bots, as well as several incarnations of my own, and decided that it is unprofitable. It may seem nearly profitable at (short) times, but the dominant bot never let it sustain beyond difficulty correction.
I keep telling you that if I release my bot right now it would be far more dangerous. If people so inactively mine with public bot, we can expect that there will be very few miners mining with my bot too. And the risk that one of them will try to perform 51% attack will be much higher. Someone have already tried to perform 51% manually when there was no bots in september.
As I said in PM, this argument is like asking us to "just trust you exclusively, 100%" instead of trusting say 4 guys each with 25% or 100 guys each with 1%.... because those other guys are of course going to be untrustworthy.
I don't know about anyone else, but I'd trust the 4 guys each with 25% before the 1 guy with 100% any day. I don't care who the 5 people in question are, but it holds *especially* true when the 1 guy is saying "no really, just trust me..."
This makes no sense at all. This claim makes me wonder if you even understand what a 51% attack really is. The whole premise of the blockchain is that it works as long as we don't trust *ANY* one person alone.
If you think that moto itself is OK now all you need is to increase public bot miners count. You tell me that they do not mine because it is unprofitable?
I tell you they do not mine because it is un-
competitive. Profitability is secondary to this. The first problem must be overcome to have any hope of ending the 51% attack without your simply deciding to end it, but BOTH problems must be overcome to stabilize the coin and assure a future for it.
I want to hear anyone who tried to mine with public bot and came to conclusion that it is unprofitable. Besides, are you sure that it is profitable for me?
More irrationality abounds! What reasoning would one have to sustain a 51% attack but altruistically select transactions,
at a loss?!??! Now who is saying very strange things?
And maybe people could start to mine even if it is unprofitable now (which I believe is not true) just to distribute hash rate and help moto become profitable?
The problem is that no-one would rationally do this unless they had some way to know that their resource contribution does have some chance at all to "help moto become profitable." Currently (as I've tried to say repeatedly) we have no way to quantify this.
I'd think that if you were really interested in the survival of this coin, you would try to find some way to give people such an assurance, and to establish this quantification for them, in some way more verifiable than "no rly guys it's 20X or something." Your *total* refusal to do anything toward this is a big part of why I am (increasingly) suspecting that you are not who you claim to be....
Would you like to offer up some evidence that you do actually control the bot, so that we might have some reason to believe that you're not just some random shill, so that we subsequently might have any reason at all to think that your "20x" might not be just some entirely made up number?
The ball is still in your court, here....