Pages:
Author

Topic: The negative impact of mining farms - page 8. (Read 10799 times)

sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 254
October 25, 2014, 01:01:03 PM
#56
Nah, I can spot butthurt when I see it.
I realize that constant loss of money due to stupidity is hard on you, but it doesn't excuse your abysmal manners Angry
hero member
Activity: 644
Merit: 504
Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks
October 25, 2014, 12:53:47 PM
#55

not mad, this is how trolls deserve to be treated, as inferior posters.

stay disingenuous & dishonest
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 254
October 25, 2014, 12:52:04 PM
#54


Stay rude and stupid.
hero member
Activity: 644
Merit: 504
Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks
October 25, 2014, 12:48:36 PM
#53
...
The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate they don't believe in their product.
...

I never made that claim.  You fail at reading just as badly you fail at basic etiquette Smiley

Where did you get the illusion that you deserve respect ?
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 254
October 25, 2014, 12:47:13 PM
#52
...
The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate they don't believe in their product.
...

I never made that claim.  You fail at reading just as badly you fail at basic etiquette Smiley
hero member
Activity: 644
Merit: 504
Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks
October 25, 2014, 12:39:36 PM
#51
...
They're hoping to be the first publicly traded Bitcoin company in the USA. You really think they "don't believe in the future of Bitcoin".
...

brg444, if you were planning to take your company public, would you announce that you don't believe in your own product?  Regardless of how you actually felt?

*And lrn to polite, faggot.

The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate they don't believe in their product.

So far, every thing indicates they are extremely bullish about it.

Try harder, troll
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 254
October 25, 2014, 12:30:58 PM
#50
...
They're hoping to be the first publicly traded Bitcoin company in the USA. You really think they "don't believe in the future of Bitcoin".
...

brg444, if you were planning to take your company public, would you announce that you don't believe in your own product?  Regardless of how you actually felt?

*And lrn to polite, faggot.
hero member
Activity: 644
Merit: 504
Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks
October 25, 2014, 12:22:45 PM
#49
There's no guarantees that these miners will be fine in the long run. That's why they'd be selling their BTC for fiat trying to expand their hashrate asap and getting a bigger share of the pie and maximize their profit potential. The mining companies who are simply holding their BTC as you say will go the way of the dodo soon.

Miners are industry insiders at the top of the pyramid. I'm sure they are pretty confident about BTC's future.

Quote
BitFury founder and CEO Valery Vavilov indicated that the new funding will allow the company to complete production of its 28nm ASIC chip without selling the reserve bitcoins it has mined from its three industrial-scale data centres.

Quote
Vavilov told CoinDesk that it decided not to tap its bitcoin reserves as it remains bullish on the long-term value of bitcoin.

"We believe in the long-term perspective [the price of bitcoin] will grow and we decided to not to sell [our bitcoin] at such a low price," Vavilov added.

Lol, a company whose worth is pegged to Bitcoin price is not going to announce "we're dumping these things as fast as we mine them, because don't believe in the future of Bitcoin."

They're hoping to be the first publicly traded Bitcoin company in the USA. You really think they "don't believe in the future of Bitcoin".

They are making MILLIONS in profit from the sale of mining rigs to other smaller mining farms. Their BTC mining is an extra curricular activity with little to no impact on their bottom line.

Try again, troll.
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 254
October 25, 2014, 12:13:45 PM
#48
There's no guarantees that these miners will be fine in the long run. That's why they'd be selling their BTC for fiat trying to expand their hashrate asap and getting a bigger share of the pie and maximize their profit potential. The mining companies who are simply holding their BTC as you say will go the way of the dodo soon.

Miners are industry insiders at the top of the pyramid. I'm sure they are pretty confident about BTC's future.

Quote
BitFury founder and CEO Valery Vavilov indicated that the new funding will allow the company to complete production of its 28nm ASIC chip without selling the reserve bitcoins it has mined from its three industrial-scale data centres.

Quote
Vavilov told CoinDesk that it decided not to tap its bitcoin reserves as it remains bullish on the long-term value of bitcoin.

"We believe in the long-term perspective [the price of bitcoin] will grow and we decided to not to sell [our bitcoin] at such a low price," Vavilov added.

Lol, a company whose worth is pegged to Bitcoin price is not going to announce "we're dumping these things as fast as we mine them, because don't believe in the future of Bitcoin."
hero member
Activity: 644
Merit: 504
Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks
October 25, 2014, 12:06:52 PM
#47
There's no guarantees that these miners will be fine in the long run. That's why they'd be selling their BTC for fiat trying to expand their hashrate asap and getting a bigger share of the pie and maximize their profit potential. The mining companies who are simply holding their BTC as you say will go the way of the dodo soon.

Miners are industry insiders at the top of the pyramid. I'm sure they are pretty confident about BTC's future.

Quote
BitFury founder and CEO Valery Vavilov indicated that the new funding will allow the company to complete production of its 28nm ASIC chip without selling the reserve bitcoins it has mined from its three industrial-scale data centres.

Quote
Vavilov told CoinDesk that it decided not to tap its bitcoin reserves as it remains bullish on the long-term value of bitcoin.

"We believe in the long-term perspective [the price of bitcoin] will grow and we decided to not to sell [our bitcoin] at such a low price," Vavilov added.
hero member
Activity: 644
Merit: 504
Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks
October 25, 2014, 11:59:56 AM
#46
They're trying to get the largest market share, and as stated their costs are bellow $400. By selling they're raising capital to expand, as long as it's above their costs they're at profit (and get the benefit of squeezing other guys out). It's a win/win sell at (some) profit and guarantee more profit. They're not wall street to play the risk game. Even if they were true believers VCs would force them to sell.

They don't necessarily have to sell to raise capital. As previously stated, all of these major companies have millions from selling mining gears.

Quote
They're not wall street to play the risk game. Even if they were true believers VCs would force them to sell.

I'm sorry but this is not true. BitFury, probably the biggest venture backed mining company is not selling ANY of the coins they mine.
sr. member
Activity: 369
Merit: 250
October 25, 2014, 09:55:57 AM
#45
I'm talking about centralization of mining and this crook Sam Cole milking BTC for fiat. Meanwhile, you're talking about BTC becoming the dominant world currency and decentralizing the global economy? I think we're on totally different pages.

And I'm saying centralization of mining is not happening and miners in majority are not dumping BTC for fiat.

Well if the mining profit margins are so narrow, how are they staying in operation without dumping BTC for fiat to cover their costs? They must have endless reserves of cash to hold all that BTC until the price rebounds right?

1. They have millions of dollars from selling mining gears
2. They have millions of dollars from VC investement
3. They have millions of dollars in Bitcoin profit from mining in the early days

So yes they must be burning through quite a lot of cash right now but in the long run they will be fine and they know it. Of course I am not suggesting they are ALL holding 100% of the Bitcoin mined but my guess is they are holding a good majority of them.

Additionally, I don't see a problem for them to cover some costs by selling to fiat during a bear market. You can be certain though that they will not "dump" their BTC during a bull market.

There's no guarantees that these miners will be fine in the long run. That's why they'd be selling their BTC for fiat trying to expand their hashrate asap and getting a bigger share of the pie and maximize their profit potential. The mining companies who are simply holding their BTC as you say will go the way of the dodo soon.
legendary
Activity: 2833
Merit: 1851
In order to dump coins one must have coins
October 25, 2014, 05:06:15 AM
#44
I'm talking about centralization of mining and this crook Sam Cole milking BTC for fiat. Meanwhile, you're talking about BTC becoming the dominant world currency and decentralizing the global economy? I think we're on totally different pages.

And I'm saying centralization of mining is not happening and miners in majority are not dumping BTC for fiat.

Well if the mining profit margins are so narrow, how are they staying in operation without dumping BTC for fiat to cover their costs? They must have endless reserves of cash to hold all that BTC until the price rebounds right?

1. They have millions of dollars from selling mining gears
2. They have millions of dollars from VC investement
3. They have millions of dollars in Bitcoin profit from mining in the early days

So yes they must be burning through quite a lot of cash right now but in the long run they will be fine and they know it. Of course I am not suggesting they are ALL holding 100% of the Bitcoin mined but my guess is they are holding a good majority of them.

Additionally, I don't see a problem for them to cover some costs by selling to fiat during a bear market. You can be certain though that they will not "dump" their BTC during a bull market.

They're trying to get the largest market share, and as stated their costs are bellow $400. By selling they're raising capital to expand, as long as it's above their costs they're at profit (and get the benefit of squeezing other guys out). It's a win/win sell at (some) profit and guarantee more profit. They're not wall street to play the risk game. Even if they were true believers VCs would force them to sell.
legendary
Activity: 2833
Merit: 1851
In order to dump coins one must have coins
October 25, 2014, 04:58:56 AM
#43
I think we're confusing few issues here. As someone else has pointed out there WILL BE around 3600btc mined each day, or around $1.2MM at current prices period. And the smaller the margin the more of the mined BTC will HAVE to be sold to cover expenses. Market has to find a price point at which there's enough demand to absorb around 3600 new btc daily regardless who mined those coins.

As far as ASIC manufacturers they're in it for the profit (Shocked shocker i know) at certain point once the risks are more known and protocol is more stable and it's easier to raise capital, it's natural for someone at the board meeting to stand up and ask why are we selling these boxes that can generate $400 at a cost of ($400 - x)Huh And business plan will naturally shift to most profitable stream and go after the biggest part of the $2B industry. The higher the profit margin the more of the pie you'll get. Naturally that will squeeze out your dorm room miners, and will be left with few ASIC manufacturers with their own mega farms (matrix comes to mind).  The cost of new entrants will be too high which would lead to monopolies/conglomerates and all the bad things that come with them, centralization regulations etc...

Hypothetical if BTC goes to $1MM Intel and AMD would probably squeeze KnC and the rest out.

But that's where halfing comes in so hopefully the risk of that will keep the REALLY big guys from entering.
hero member
Activity: 644
Merit: 504
Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks
October 24, 2014, 11:27:02 PM
#42
I'm talking about centralization of mining and this crook Sam Cole milking BTC for fiat. Meanwhile, you're talking about BTC becoming the dominant world currency and decentralizing the global economy? I think we're on totally different pages.

And I'm saying centralization of mining is not happening and miners in majority are not dumping BTC for fiat.

Well if the mining profit margins are so narrow, how are they staying in operation without dumping BTC for fiat to cover their costs? They must have endless reserves of cash to hold all that BTC until the price rebounds right?

1. They have millions of dollars from selling mining gears
2. They have millions of dollars from VC investement
3. They have millions of dollars in Bitcoin profit from mining in the early days

So yes they must be burning through quite a lot of cash right now but in the long run they will be fine and they know it. Of course I am not suggesting they are ALL holding 100% of the Bitcoin mined but my guess is they are holding a good majority of them.

Additionally, I don't see a problem for them to cover some costs by selling to fiat during a bear market. You can be certain though that they will not "dump" their BTC during a bull market.
sr. member
Activity: 369
Merit: 250
October 24, 2014, 11:24:49 PM
#41
I'm talking about centralization of mining and this crook Sam Cole milking BTC for fiat. Meanwhile, you're talking about BTC becoming the dominant world currency and decentralizing the global economy? I think we're on totally different pages.

And I'm saying centralization of mining is not happening and miners in majority are not dumping BTC for fiat.

Well if the mining profit margins are so narrow, how are they staying in operation without dumping BTC for fiat to cover their costs? They must have endless reserves of cash to hold all that BTC until the price rebounds right?
hero member
Activity: 644
Merit: 504
Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks
October 24, 2014, 08:39:41 PM
#40
I'm talking about centralization of mining and this crook Sam Cole milking BTC for fiat. Meanwhile, you're talking about BTC becoming the dominant world currency and decentralizing the global economy? I think we're on totally different pages.

And I'm saying centralization of mining is not happening and miners in majority are not dumping BTC for fiat.
sr. member
Activity: 369
Merit: 250
October 24, 2014, 08:07:56 PM
#39

Regulated by whom? A centralized authority? Syndicates aka mafias? I can only speak for myself, but I sure wouldn't trust them.

Regulated by each and everyone of the countries where they are based.

Again, understand that I'm not referring to regulation that would allow for coercion of mining syndicates into maliciously using their power but regulation that would limit their hashing growth so as to secure the decentralization of the now global (in this scenario) Bitcoin economy.

You'd have no choice but to trust them.


I'm talking about centralization of mining and this crook Sam Cole milking BTC for fiat. Meanwhile, you're talking about BTC becoming the dominant world currency and decentralizing the global economy? I think we're on totally different pages.
hero member
Activity: 644
Merit: 504
Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks
October 24, 2014, 05:59:26 PM
#38
I strongly disagree with that idea. The moment you see a regulation of who gets to post new valid blocks is a big red warning sign.

Correct, it does raise a dangerous precedent.

You simply can't regulate this market, it's global and anonnymous, you don't know who is mining and where he is.

Yes and no.

If we assume Bitcoin is behind the world's financial system then I can certainly envision a scenario where governments would want to use force to prevent some mining installations from approaching uncomfortable hashing %.

Considering the advent of mining farms it certainly is possible to find out where the operations are located. This is not someone mining on his computer anymore.

Of course this is all speculation. If Bitcoin achieves global reserve status then it is fair to question whether governments will have much power at all.
sr. member
Activity: 269
Merit: 250
October 24, 2014, 04:36:06 PM
#37

You simply can't regulate this market, it's global and anonnymous, you don't know who is mining and where he is.

You could by having a large group of miners collude (ignoring your blocks). It will be observable, it will destroy trust, it could happen.

[edit] One should never forget that the rules governing bitcoin are just program code being executed on many machines. Code that can be changed.
We as participants decide what version we trust, which rules we accept. I would not put it into the realm of the impossible that by law states would try to prevent individuals from mining.
We also know that this thing is like a hydra. Try to behead it and see what you get Wink

Pages:
Jump to: