Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 16207. (Read 26725292 times)
October 28, 2017, 06:10:55 PM
October 28, 2017, 06:05:38 PM
What -- exactly -- do you find _unfair_ about the current situation? Some had the foresight, drive, business acumen, and such to actually get into the business of making ASICs. Others used similar resources to build datacenters full of miners. These avenues are still open today for anyone suitably talented and driven. It is perfectly fair.
Who cares about fairness? The problem is that with ASICs it's too easy to quasi-monopolize the mining scene, and what is worse is that either some major players in the scene are not economically rational or they are pawns of some bigger hands behind the scene, which is why they're apparently just doing their best to destroy BTC not actually caring about the future success of their shitcoin -which is impossible because if they manage to kill btc any reason to trust a clone will die with it.
Even if the battle will go on undecided the risk of 51% attacks will likely increase. So it's a crappy situation with no end in sight which I would solve with a change in PoW so to leave the ASIC farmers and their owners alone with their chinacoins.
October 28, 2017, 05:51:08 PM
October 28, 2017, 05:41:10 PM
(nonsense)
Ignored.
But it's interesting how Vertcoin is pumping lately. It must be a coincidence. It can't be related to the ASICs politics b/s in BTC.
Interesting
October 28, 2017, 05:29:21 PM
However, cheap electricity, newest generation chips, and other factors that are now unbalancing the game won't be that relevant anymore, and there will be much fairer competition.
What -- exactly -- do you find _unfair_ about the current situation?
That's the point - not avoiding concentration, but letting concentration happen with similar ease almost everywhere. So Average David can spend 1000$, and his 1000$ are worth almost exactly as much as Goliath's 1000$.
David has some advantages that Goliath does not. For instance, applying the 'waste' heat to a real need. This is something that can be done at small scale, and cannot (or at least currently is not) done at scale.Quote
Any American could put up a mining rig knowing that electricity costs are not the bottleneck anymore.
Nonsense. Electrical costs will always be a dominant factor in Bitcoin mining. Whether in flip flops in an ASIC or words in a memory column, each bit flip requires some number of Joules of energy. I canna change the laws of physics, captain!
Right, I can't. Even if I could, I would be wary. I'm just an ordinary guy. 
October 28, 2017, 05:14:50 PM
However, cheap electricity, newest generation chips, and other factors that are now unbalancing the game won't be that relevant anymore, and there will be much fairer competition.
What -- exactly -- do you find _unfair_ about the current situation? Some had the foresight, drive, business acumen, and such to actually get into the business of making ASICs. Others used similar resources to build datacenters full of miners. These avenues are still open today for anyone suitably talented and driven. It is perfectly fair.
Quote
That's the point - not avoiding concentration, but letting concentration happen with similar ease almost everywhere. So Average David can spend 1000$, and his 1000$ are worth almost exactly as much as Goliath's 1000$.
David has some advantages that Goliath does not. For instance, applying the 'waste' heat to a real need. This is something that can be done at small scale, and cannot (or at least currently is not) done at scale.
Quote
Any American could put up a mining rig knowing that electricity costs are not the bottleneck anymore.
Nonsense. Electrical costs will always be a dominant factor in Bitcoin mining. Whether in flip flops in an ASIC or words in a memory column, each bit flip requires some number of Joules of energy.
I canna change the laws of physics, captain!
October 28, 2017, 04:31:28 PM
Those with the resources and wherewithal will not need to _emulate_ terabytes of memory. They will simply _buy_ them. And expend the effort and deploy the ingenuity required to build up large datacenters of 'em.
Not as easy as buying miners or emulating phones. Not as economical. Not as scalable. Of course, if they have resources and want to use them, they're free to.However, cheap electricity, newest generation chips, and other factors that are now unbalancing the game won't be that relevant anymore, and there will be much fairer competition. That's the point - not avoiding concentration, but letting concentration happen with similar ease almost everywhere. So Average David can spend 1000$, and his 1000$ are worth almost exactly as much as Goliath's 1000$.
Today, specialized and generic hardware have performances orders of magnitude away. With this equalizing move, the difference would drop to well under a SINGLE factor of 10 - probably a lot less. Any American could put up a mining rig knowing that electricity costs are not the bottleneck anymore. That would be a significant change.
October 28, 2017, 04:19:19 PM
Volumes are getting low on many markets, probably the early sign of large move ahead in next few days
October 28, 2017, 03:22:49 PM
Spoken like a true r.
You buy this stuff, Bob? Should I look into it? What _does_ the scientific community have to say about it? I haven't done much reading lately.
Just finished Stefan's second installment. He seems to be coming at it from some bias, and some assertions are unsupported (maybe he has footnotes in the text below? I'll go back and check later), but seems mostly balanced. This is my first exposure to this area of thought. So far, I am quite intrigued.
October 28, 2017, 03:20:29 PM
BCH is a non-starter,
Au contraire, my good friend - BCH is off to a smashing start.
Cheers!
edit: Support from Luke-jr!? Will wonders never cease? Of course, it is merely _qualified_ support - as in his claim that Bitcoin Cash is superior to Litecoin. A proposition with which I can heartily agree.
October 28, 2017, 03:17:40 PM
Quote
*Unless a change in POW helps to equalize mining power by making costs harder to scale.
...Your apparent belief that a change in PoW will make any difference in centralization is unpersuasive. No matter the technology, mining power will coalesce to those that possess the financial resources, the BizOps acumen, and most importantly the persistence and pain tolerance needed for entrepreneurship on a grand scale.I don't believe this is true. If somehow PoW can be tied to a smartphone for "one phone one vote", those who have financial resources can screw themselves against the brute force of several billion smartphone users.
Just No. Those that have the resources will run hundreds of android emulator VMs on each of hundreds of servers, and we'll be right back with the same centralization problem we have today.
Those with the resources and wherewithal will not need to _emulate_ terabytes of memory. They will simply _buy_ them. And expend the effort and deploy the ingenuity required to build up large datacenters of 'em.
The broke and the lazy (i.e., the vast majority) will once again succumb to centralization of mining by large organizations.
October 28, 2017, 03:06:51 PM
I'm liking the new avatar BMB, you buy that with our pants?
October 28, 2017, 03:06:19 PM
Quote
Likewise, almost all human fags are bisexual, and many men become gay only after failing with women. Being gay permits the occasional “experimental” bang with a girlfriend. Hence the K male’s aversion to fags and fag hags.
Science...I'm not sure if this is a subtle jab at me or not - forgive me, I have been imbibing this afternoon - but I'm not here to debate the genetics of homosexuality.
For the purposes of r/K selection discussion, let's - Please - not bring my personality into this.
It was a quote from the article. I thought it was obvious I was critical. I'm sorry if I offended you.
It's a shame that the person who wrote this article had to sprinkle this article with a heavy dose of his bias. I could see that there seemed to be some actual facts there. It soon became absolutely unpalatable. Reminds me of the time when I was a child and wanted to sprinkle some minced garlic in my ramen. Unfortunately, the top of the minced garlic fell off. I tried to eat the concoction, and ended up developing an offensive aroma about me that didn't go away for a week.
October 28, 2017, 03:01:18 PM
Who would win in a fight: Wu Jihan or Adam Back?
I think Jihan would. He strike me as more cunning. I think he would be able to come up with a dirty tactic much sooner than Adam would.
Maybe so, I mean Jihan is so full of rage because he's not the boss of bitcoin, and he probably knows some martial arts way of using it, but Adam is so damn calm...
October 28, 2017, 02:58:55 PM
Quote
Likewise, almost all human fags are bisexual, and many men become gay only after failing with women. Being gay permits the occasional “experimental” bang with a girlfriend. Hence the K male’s aversion to fags and fag hags.
Science...I'm not sure if this is a subtle jab at me or not - forgive me, I have been imbibing this afternoon - but I'm not here to debate the genetics of homosexuality.
For the purposes of r/K selection discussion, let's - Please - not bring my personality into this.
It was a quote from the article. I thought it was obvious I was critical. I'm sorry if I offended you.
October 28, 2017, 02:57:49 PM
Who would win in a fight: Wu Jihan or Adam Back?
I think Jihan would. He strikes me as more cunning. I think that he would be able to come up with a dirty low blow tactic much sooner than Adam would.
October 28, 2017, 02:54:59 PM
Who would win in a fight: Wu Jihan or Adam Back?
October 28, 2017, 02:40:10 PM
You buy this stuff, Bob? Should I look into it? What _does_ the scientific community have to say about it? I haven't done much reading lately.
I'm not here to buy or sell anything other than lulz/bantz.
Having said that, as an organism that seeks to understand more about itself and the environment it lives in, learning about r/K Selection Theory in these last few days has been blowing my mind, and I've been consuming a considerable amount of time researching it further.
I can't really argue against the core theory. Looking at the path my own life has taken me, viewed through an r/K lense, I see the purity of it all.
http://www.truthjustice.net/politics/rk-selection-the-forbidden-theory/
Yeah
Quote
Likewise, almost all human fags are bisexual, and many men become gay only after failing with women. Being gay permits the occasional “experimental” bang with a girlfriend. Hence the K male’s aversion to fags and fag hags.
Science... October 28, 2017, 02:35:30 PM
BTG could have had "some potential" had they not been so secret about it and didn't premine it. That alone makes it a non-starter.
BCH is a non-starter, didn't stop anybody from hucking money at it.
BCH didn't have a premine and was better organized...
Well whoever has that premine should be hucking money at it.
I'll wait.
Luke is all in
https://mobile.twitter.com/LukeDashjr/status/923435699084431360
October 28, 2017, 02:32:06 PM
On a totally unrelated note, alt gold is down to 1% and I haven't even seen any yet. Not the candied apple windfall some of us had hoped for. 
I transferred a small portion of my BTC to Yobit before the snapshot, so I was able to dump a little bit at a little less than .09 BTC on the futures market they have there. Unfortunately, they opened the market while I was still sleeping, so I couldn't dump when it was around .15 BTG. However, I really wasn't willing to take a large counterparty risk by leaving coins on Yobit. So my gain was not spectacular, to say the least.
I suspect the main reason for the 1% value has to do with lack of evidence for what the replay protection is actually going to entail. Once the details of the replay protection are made clear, if it is sound, you may see a small price recovery of BTG. Unfortunately, the huge dumping will begin soon after any small recovery.
Jump to: