At this point I am working under the assumption (and I hope I am wrong) that the 2 MB hard fork of the SegWit2X NYA will not happen and the Chinese mining cartel is not really upset because they are planning on using Bitcoin Cash to take over control of Bitcoin. I would be interested in hearing from those who think this poker game will end with Core the winner and why. There is a lot of money at stake here.
Bitcoin Cash can not become the dominate chain since its future is more risky than
sticking with the current chain. It is fine to throw a little bit of hash on the Bcash chain
and get some coins and hold for unexpected profit in the future, but if miners move
majority of their hash to that chain, thus directly harming the Bitcoin chain, they will
have placed their future in the hands of Bcash, which will be regulated by the Chinese
Government and its Intelligence services. Bcash is not about freedom or bigger blocks,
it is about steering the network in a way in which it becomes capturable and thus
compliant to regulation directly within the protocol. It will be enforced by government
approved, licensed, and controlled miners.
...
Miners are essentially squatters. If they get up and move, they will lose their place.
So the first miners to fully move over to Bcash are the first losers in the larger game.
That is why some are just dipping their toes, it's because no one really wants to swim.
What place would that be?
What with this anti-chinese miners posting that's been going on for too long?
1) Majority of all large companies and industries that are Chinese are internally
controlled/steered by their government. This is not only done for the purpose
of manipulation of markets, preventing competition, and other aspects within
their society, but also for military/intelligence strategic purposes.
In the west, it is known (and unknown) that many western companies may
work with their governments secretly or have divisions within them where
there are government employees stationed for expedition of certain national
security interests, but that is very different than with China. In the west, it
could be contested or denied, you are not forced to work with or for the
government (unless in war time), since corporations are separate entities by
design, but in China they are not really separate and can not be contested. If
you do not comply, you are shut down and then taken away from you and
given to a government proxy. Almost all major companies/industries are
actually owned and controlled by the Chinese government.
So, the evidence needed to prove this could happen with Bitcoin is not needed
within a press release where they publicly announce to the world that they will
do this, because it is already common practice in China with large corps. Their
miners will be forced to be licensed and approved by their government. That
license will be contingent that they comply with governmental directives. If the
government wants them to restrict certain UTXOs, or maybe roll back work, it
could be possible to do so. When this occurs, those Chinese miners are forced to
do it to "keep their jobs and money" or "stay in business" and not be thrown in
jail. It is not a malicious miner attack to destroy the network for them, it is a
roll back attack so that they get to keep their jobs and money from their
government taking it all away from them. That is a realistic concern that
must be weighted into the future and future possible actions as likely to occur.
If it never does, well then great, but to deny it until there is a press release will
mean we will be reactionary when it occurs. It is conceivable and likely now.
2) The place I am talking about is their position within the block competition race.
If they move majority of their hash to BCH and leave BTC, they are taking a major
risk. It is one thing to do this with altcoin mining, where ultimately they convert
those coins into BTC, but to risk that with BTC itself, is too crazy for me to believe.
Maybe I will be wrong, maybe miners are truly 100% dumb greed and not 100%
smart greed, but we'll see what occurs in a short amount of time now.
3) I have no problem with the Chinese people or the Chinese Miner operators,
in general. When I say, the "Chinese Miners" what I'm really meaning is the large
amount of hash that is located within one country, that is under the control of a
government who is not friendly toward what the cypherpunk or western human rights
ideals are. It is not directed toward the race of people, it is directed toward their
government, when I say it, and IMO I think that is what most people mean when
they say the "Chinese miners". If someone is a miner who is also Chinese, but lives
outside of China and is mining in Europe or wherever, I don't include that miner
within my term of "Chinese Miners". Maybe people should say "People's Republic
of China Miners" (PRoC Miners) to be more specific?
To me, Chinese Miners = PRoC Miners.
Edit: To add to my third statement, today there is some info circulating that
the Russian Government is going to get involved in mining bitcoins, and that they
supposedly want to compete against the Chinese Miners. That is fine in theory,
but my concerns about the "PRoC Miners" I stated above will also be applied to
this "Russian Miners" possibility.
Interestingly, if this is serious and takes off, it may mark the start of a new era
of Bitcoin mining, where individual countries will need to mine the Bitcoin chain
themselves, with public governmental authority and tax money backing, to ensure
that their countries and their citizens txs are not restricted or denied by other
countries, especially for scenarios where one day Oil is denominated and paid
only by BTC. They will be forced to secure the Bitcoin chain, so that they are
not denied of or extorted, for resources or trade on-chain later in the future.
Fun possibilities indeed.
