Topic: I am here to guide all of you. (Read 3128 times)

OK, I'd say Maria6.0 is just goobering with us about being an old hat, but what did she actually say that's worth discussing? Do we have anyone who is willing to step up to the plate if and when a developer ragequits like Mike Hearn did? Do we have anyone who is willing to invest in a decent mining rig to help maintain the network, and maybe run a Bitcoin node too so we can keep it from getting too centralized? If we're worried about the cost of electricity, would we be willing to invest in solar power too, or at least take a look at a decent altcoin that uses a more efficient algorithm?

You started the thread off rather arrogant. I couldn't imagine reading the rest.

Yeah, you are true. It is the difficulty which make a thing meaningful. It is a way to make the bitcoin a meaningful currency. It should be produced the using the same energy as other currency so that it be able to compete with other currencies.

Based on the electricity costs to mine a bitcoin, the first bitcoin's exchange rate was fixed.

I was researching bytecoin BTE, it seems like the solution to many problems.

Maria.

I guess my previous post was not clear.  Many alt coins have tried to create an "ASIC proof" coin to replace Bitcoin and have failed.  Part of the reason is that the alt coin space is filled with scam coins but the other reason is that proof of work requires work and work adds value.  The main point being Bitcoin is Bitcoin and any change, especially something major like a change to the mining algorithm, is no longer Bitcoin - it is just another alt.  So you can't change Bitcoin at a fundamental level like this by design.

I do not understand concern about getting "mining power back in the hands of the general users".

When I got into mining I bought a very large tower computer with a very large 3000W power supply, added six GPU cards, ran them as fast as I could, joined a pool, and started mining.  Total cost to me was about $2500 and this thing used a lot of electricity.  Taking all the electricity bills into account [including AC] I probably just about broke even on the deal.  I would have been much better off by far to just have bought 500 BTC for the $2,500 and just held them.

Today you can buy an S7 for about $1,500, set it up, join a pool and go for it.  I expect you will just about break even and that buying and holding $1,500 worth of BTC will probably make you more money in the long run.

So, it appears to me that not much has really changed.

This.  The point is that if any "ASIC proof" coin were to actually take off and become worth anything then there would be a profit in creating machines to do it better, faster and more efficiently. Since there would be a profit in it someone would do it.

The economic success of any coin pretty much dooms it to centralization.

there is no asic proof technology, if it can be mined with a gpu it can be mined with an asic, the difference is the cost involved, and forced by a certain algo, especially on the memory side

but if for the asic company this will be profitable they will certain jump on it, right now some algo seems immune to asic, only because their alt is useless, not worth anything

Introducing the MikeKarplesCoin5000 its either doomed to fail or u will go to jail

BurtW are you saying a Alt coin with ASIC-proof technology could replace Bitcoin, if it has the same functionality as Bitcoin, but just need to be tweaked to be ASIC-proof? Why has nobody implemented something like this before and replaced Bitcoin?

I agree with the ASIC's being more energy efficient and adding value with the energy/work being spend to sustain it, but there should be some better solution to place some mining power back into the hands of the general users, without sacrificing the value?

I looked at some of the Alt coins, but most of them look like a Pump and dump and not a coin that wants to address this problem. ^hmmmm^

Whether Satoshi desired, expected or even thought about mining pools, GPUs, and ASICs is not really relevant.  ASICs are more energy efficient so they win in an energy intensive environment like Bitcoin mining.  That is the way it is and it can not be changed without creating an alt coin - which has been attempted/done many times.

Bitcoin is secured by the massive amounts of energy/work required overtake the blockchain.  That is one of the things that gives Bitcoins their intrinsic value.  It is an integral part of what Bitcoin is.

Well same goes for WeRuleTheCoin3000, where a few of us have enough money to make all the major decisions and determine the future of the Blockchain. At this moment the

mining is getting more and more centralized and more expensive. In a few years only a selected few will be in the position financially to run huge data centers to mine the coin.

Do you really think that is the direction we need to go with this experience? I do not have the answer for this problem, but I know centralized mining is not the Satoshi vision

for this. 

i welcome you to PumpNDumpcoin4500, you can mine it with your GPU and get 500000 coins every 10 minutes. and then convert them for 500000 satoshi (0.05btc). enjoy

Isn't prunning being available in the next version coming soon? (0.12). I heard that it will allow for 1GB blockchains and we will be able to do everything the same as we do now with full, so its pretty cool for modest hardware nodes.

No matter what the implementation, the OP is 100% correct... Centralized mining farms should not be the route we follow with this experiment. The whole development of these

ASIC's just spoiled the party for millions to enter this scene. The whole thrill of Bitcoin was in the joy of tinkering with a GPU and overclocking a computer to maximize your

opportunity to mine a block. I wish more people could have that opportunity again to feel that thrill and excitement.   

Pruning is "on the schedule" but not critical since 60 GB is not a burden to the current miners and full nodes.  It would be a burden to "everyone"  in the plan being discussed here.

Pruning does not help with the current UTXO memory load for all miners and full nodes.

Pruning does not help with bandwidth requirements [except for new node downloads].

At which point we start truncating the blockchain? 60 gig download is crazy. Max should be 4Gb

Difficulty made bitcoin more solid. You can be sure that millions of people is never gonna compete with GPU mining. It's pretty normal that ASICs started to get produced and kept going on this way. But just look at the difference. When was the btc more like a currency than a geek stuff.?

You: Thats because the difficulty is up. You see, the network performs a calcu...

Noob: ZzzzZZzzzzz...

You: 

Interesting topic for a complete noob on mining like me. I'm sorry I will just have to comment on this so I can easily find it later when I have time to read all what is written here.

If you want everyone to run a full node and/or mine you forgot a couple things here so I added them for you:

though i personally love VB and many of the younger generation prefer it as their first attempts into coding..so i have had alot more success teaching people to understand bitcoins mechanics using vb easier than c++.. but C++ has got more utility for the die hard coders. i know its possible to write a fullnode in VB, i done it and a few others have too.. i know its possible to write a fullnode in java as others have done that, and other languages too. but c++ has other advantages.

and as for an algorithm change to try to force solo mining, well that will never happen..
anything a cpu does can be duplicated and refined into a more dedicated task (thats what asics are). so it wouldnt take long to make an asic.
even if the new algo had some 'hard drive mining' and 'ram mining' stuff which some alts have tried.. that too can be replicated too, so it wont kill off the pool/farm/syndicated mining race.

but if anyone wants to make an alt now.. the emphasis definitely should be on transactions per second, without causing too much bloat.
with added functionality for users to know and understand things like opcodes and block limits so they can self adjust the settings without relying on certain third parties who may have other agenda's, to come to the realization of how much power decentralized consensus has over miners. rather than the other way around