Personally i don't even think any particular country can find new technology to mine bitcoins that other countries would not be aware of So no i don't take it as a threat.
I agree some miners will quit mining in 2016 due to decrease in supply but many others will join too due to increase in price..Yes mining will not be the same and will be much more difficult but With change in time and technology new techniques and devices will be surely developed to mine and ofcource this will not be done by one particular country alone.
Topic: Would you consider this as a possible threat to Bitcoin? (Read 1693 times)
natural evolution of bitcoin
Don't agree with this sentence. Cannot be the natural evolution of something a possible threat for itself. The history of human being testify the opposite. If this shall be true the human being must be disappeared time ago from the process of the evolution which last since 2.4 billion years since the first signs of life were appeared on the earth. It was the opposite. The human being is now a wonderful creature. And having in mind the beginning (see for more here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_evolutionary_history_of_life) there are no more need for other facts about the truthfully of this event.
There must be incidents during the road (as it were and are the various wars) but the end is (it was since today) positive and the continuous going forward.
We already know the Chinese miners have a advantage over other miners in the world, namely cheaper electricity.
We also know that the halving will happen in 2016 and most miners will struggle to make a profit and they will quit mining, if the price of Bitcoin do not increase with the halving.
The only people who might still make a profit, will be the people with the cheap electricity or those who has some sort of edge over the rest.
This already happened when ASIC's were introduced, and most CPU/GPU solo miners left the mining scene, because they could not stay profitable and compete with the people
who used the ASIC's.
Let's say this does happen, and we are left with one nation or geographical area dominating the mining scene, will this not be seen as centralization and a possible weak point?
Another scenario could be, where say Finland create some sort of new ASIC chip or new technology that is capable of doing much more calculations and they then decide not
to export it to other nations and just dominate the mining scene. The difficulty would increase and the people with the old technology will be pushed out of mining in theory.
Do you perceive this as a possible threat? Or just the natural evolution of Bitcoin?
We also know that the halving will happen in 2016 and most miners will struggle to make a profit and they will quit mining, if the price of Bitcoin do not increase with the halving.
The only people who might still make a profit, will be the people with the cheap electricity or those who has some sort of edge over the rest.
This already happened when ASIC's were introduced, and most CPU/GPU solo miners left the mining scene, because they could not stay profitable and compete with the people
who used the ASIC's.
Let's say this does happen, and we are left with one nation or geographical area dominating the mining scene, will this not be seen as centralization and a possible weak point?
Another scenario could be, where say Finland create some sort of new ASIC chip or new technology that is capable of doing much more calculations and they then decide not
to export it to other nations and just dominate the mining scene. The difficulty would increase and the people with the old technology will be pushed out of mining in theory.
Do you perceive this as a possible threat? Or just the natural evolution of Bitcoin?
While I do tend to agree with your points, I also do find it a bit doomthinking. I personally don't see it that much as threat.
One way or the other, there is and will always be a certain part of the world dominating the mining industry. Especially when several large mining farms decide to halt their operations as they struggle to make profit.
Money always wins, whether we like it or not. The only thing we can do is hoping current non Chinese mining farms will continue with their operations also after several more block halvings.
I worked in a company, where we prepared "Disaster recovery plans" for companies to get them operational, after different disasters hit them, and they were very glad that these plans were in place, when those things
happened. I think it's a good thing to have "Disaster recovery plans" for Bitcoin too, to help us to recover or to prevent these situations before or after it happens. This debate could spark some actions plans to prevent
these types of scenarios, before it happens.
We also know that the halving will happen in 2016 and most miners will struggle to make a profit and they will quit mining, if the price of Bitcoin do not increase with the halving.
I think the price of BTC will increase for two reasons:
1. More people will be aware of BTC hence the demand will go up.
2. The difficulty of mining will increase and no one would be selling their hard earned BTC cheap.
Let's say this does happen, and we are left with one nation or geographical area dominating the mining scene, will this not be seen as centralization and a possible weak point?
No. We all love bananas and there is no problem with that they are produced mostly in India, China, Uganda and Philippines. And another example would be the situation with diamonds. Russia, Botswana, The Democratic Republic of Congo, Angola ... Is that a problem that the most of the diamonds are produced there? C'mon!
Comparing the love of bananas to a multi Billion dollar payment network or global currency, is not exactly comparing apples with almonds.
We also know that the halving will happen in 2016 and most miners will struggle to make a profit and they will quit mining, if the price of Bitcoin do not increase with the halving.
I think the price of BTC will increase for two reasons:
1. More people will be aware of BTC hence the demand will go up.
2. The difficulty of mining will increase and no one would be selling their hard earned BTC cheap.
Let's say this does happen, and we are left with one nation or geographical area dominating the mining scene, will this not be seen as centralization and a possible weak point?
No. We all love bananas and there is no problem with that they are produced mostly in India, China, Uganda and Philippines. And another example would be the situation with diamonds. Russia, Botswana, The Democratic Republic of Congo, Angola ... Is that a problem that the most of the diamonds are produced there? C'mon!
We already know the Chinese miners have a advantage over other miners in the world, namely cheaper electricity.
We also know that the halving will happen in 2016 and most miners will struggle to make a profit and they will quit mining, if the price of Bitcoin do not increase with the halving.
The only people who might still make a profit, will be the people with the cheap electricity or those who has some sort of edge over the rest.
This already happened when ASIC's were introduced, and most CPU/GPU solo miners left the mining scene, because they could not stay profitable and compete with the people
who used the ASIC's.
Let's say this does happen, and we are left with one nation or geographical area dominating the mining scene, will this not be seen as centralization and a possible weak point?
Another scenario could be, where say Finland create some sort of new ASIC chip or new technology that is capable of doing much more calculations and they then decide not
to export it to other nations and just dominate the mining scene. The difficulty would increase and the people with the old technology will be pushed out of mining in theory.
Do you perceive this as a possible threat? Or just the natural evolution of Bitcoin?
We also know that the halving will happen in 2016 and most miners will struggle to make a profit and they will quit mining, if the price of Bitcoin do not increase with the halving.
The only people who might still make a profit, will be the people with the cheap electricity or those who has some sort of edge over the rest.
This already happened when ASIC's were introduced, and most CPU/GPU solo miners left the mining scene, because they could not stay profitable and compete with the people
who used the ASIC's.
Let's say this does happen, and we are left with one nation or geographical area dominating the mining scene, will this not be seen as centralization and a possible weak point?
Another scenario could be, where say Finland create some sort of new ASIC chip or new technology that is capable of doing much more calculations and they then decide not
to export it to other nations and just dominate the mining scene. The difficulty would increase and the people with the old technology will be pushed out of mining in theory.
Do you perceive this as a possible threat? Or just the natural evolution of Bitcoin?
While I do tend to agree with your points, I also do find it a bit doomthinking. I personally don't see it that much as threat.
One way or the other, there is and will always be a certain part of the world dominating the mining industry. Especially when several large mining farms decide to halt their operations as they struggle to make profit.
Money always wins, whether we like it or not. The only thing we can do is hoping current non Chinese mining farms will continue with their operations also after several more block halvings.
It is really difficult to tell, companies like 21 and Bitfury are receiving massive VC money from various investors. I think that more companies/countries will be able to compete with China regarding the bitcoin mining majority.
The VC money will not make a difference in the profitability of the mining. None of the investors will keep investing in something if it is not profitable for them. ^hmf^ There might be a problem, but pools might shift to accommodate for this, like they have done previously, when there was a possibility for a 51% attack.
It will be interesting to see, what people will do if something like this could happen and how fast this will countered.
If the price of Bitcoin doesn't improve or gets lower, the west might end up mining in Iceland and that one area of Washington state. Hope their internet links are robust!
It is really difficult to tell, companies like 21 and Bitfury are receiving massive VC money from various investors. I think that more companies/countries will be able to compete with China regarding the bitcoin mining majority.
What do you have against the Chinese? I live in China (sort of) and I trust them more than I trust the westerners.
It's just a example closest to a scenario I could use, where the total collapse of the network could be dependent on a single country doing most of the mining. The Chinese
government is known for their censoring of certain aspects of the internet, so it's even a bigger threat than any other country. A political decision to ban mining could have a
significant impact on the total hashing power of Bitcoin.
We already know the Chinese miners have a advantage over other miners in the world, namely cheaper electricity.
We also know that the halving will happen in 2016 and most miners will struggle to make a profit and they will quit mining, if the price of Bitcoin do not increase with the halving.
The only people who might still make a profit, will be the people with the cheap electricity or those who has some sort of edge over the rest.
This already happened when ASIC's were introduced, and most CPU/GPU solo miners left the mining scene, because they could not stay profitable and compete with the people
who used the ASIC's.
Let's say this does happen, and we are left with one nation or geographical area dominating the mining scene, will this not be seen as centralization and a possible weak point?
Another scenario could be, where say Finland create some sort of new ASIC chip or new technology that is capable of doing much more calculations and they then decide not
to export it to other nations and just dominate the mining scene. The difficulty would increase and the people with the old technology will be pushed out of mining in theory.
Do you perceive this as a possible threat? Or just the natural evolution of Bitcoin?
We also know that the halving will happen in 2016 and most miners will struggle to make a profit and they will quit mining, if the price of Bitcoin do not increase with the halving.
The only people who might still make a profit, will be the people with the cheap electricity or those who has some sort of edge over the rest.
This already happened when ASIC's were introduced, and most CPU/GPU solo miners left the mining scene, because they could not stay profitable and compete with the people
who used the ASIC's.
Let's say this does happen, and we are left with one nation or geographical area dominating the mining scene, will this not be seen as centralization and a possible weak point?
Another scenario could be, where say Finland create some sort of new ASIC chip or new technology that is capable of doing much more calculations and they then decide not
to export it to other nations and just dominate the mining scene. The difficulty would increase and the people with the old technology will be pushed out of mining in theory.
Do you perceive this as a possible threat? Or just the natural evolution of Bitcoin?
According to me this scenarios are a good imagination but nothing else.
First scenario that suppose that Chinese can dominate the scene of mining cannot be known because the technology can invent things (minings hardware) that can overcome the cheap electricity of the firsts. So the other miners will not go out of mining. This is most probable to be true according to me than your first supposition.
The same with the second scenario. Why must be only Finland that will create this hardware? Have no arguments about this. There are to many the businesses which produce hardware for mining and are no reason's that those cannot invent mining hardware less good than Finland.
So, as a conclusion your fear, I think, it is without bases and you must remain sure that no one of your supposed things cannot happen.
Once again I just picked a country as a example... Do not concentrate too much on the country... rather debate the possibility of the scenario. If a company put a patent on that
new technology, nobody can manufacture that technology and they can decide where they want to export it.
This is just natural BTC evolution and nothing more BTC mining is expanding worldwide
BTC mining is expanding worldwide 
Nicely explained about the problem in future through which bitcoin has to pass. But as future can't be predicted which also holds for bitcoin prices and its uses.
Mining will only be dominated by these chinese and finland miners if the price don't go up till the halving in july 2016 and we know the price is not sure what it will be in that date.
So we have to focus on increasing the uses of bitcoin and also have to hope that bitcoin will be accepted by lots of merchants from all over the world in near future.
Mining will only be dominated by these chinese and finland miners if the price don't go up till the halving in july 2016 and we know the price is not sure what it will be in that date.
So we have to focus on increasing the uses of bitcoin and also have to hope that bitcoin will be accepted by lots of merchants from all over the world in near future.
natural evolution of bitcoin
I had to agree. Chinese supremacy is not not a threat. Bitcoin mining is a free market, you are free to mine and Chinese miners are taking that opportunity.If rest of the world are not mining then it is their own fault and part of natural selection. Don't fear others, fear your own incapability to adapt.
I don't see this as a threat to Bitcoin itself What is a threat to bitcoin is the price (the fact that it could crash) and the slow adaptation rate.
Centralization of mining could be a threat in bitcoin as a whole (51% attack and such).
but a threat to the miners who are not keeping up to date with the technology
Even if miners keep track of what's the latest technology in mining is, if a large entity controls 51% of the network hashrate, those technology would be useless.
What is a threat to bitcoin is the price (the fact that it could crash) and the slow adaptation rate.
Nope, price alone is subjective. What threatens bitcoin much is regulation, laws and people not using bitcoin as it should be.
Another scenario could be, where say Finland create some sort of new ASIC chip or new technology that is capable of doing much more calculations and they then decide not
to export it to other nations and just dominate the mining scene. The difficulty would increase and the people with the old technology will be pushed out of mining in theory.
Whoever will make faster chip will produce them and sell and earn profit. They will not bother with paying electricity, mine Bitcoins and sell them and ...
They will just sell as much as possible to whoever will want to take them.
Agreed, but recently, the advancement on creating faster and efficient chip had declined and the expected advancement of microprocessors every 2 years have turned into 2 1/2 years, as stated by Intel. (see Moore's Law), so creating faster chips with efficient power is somehow slowed.
I don't see this as a threat to Bitcoin itself, but a threat to the miners who are not keeping up to date with the technology. What is a threat to bitcoin is the price (the fact that it could crash) and the slow adaptation rate.
Another scenario could be, where say Finland create some sort of new ASIC chip or new technology that is capable of doing much more calculations and they then decide not
to export it to other nations and just dominate the mining scene. The difficulty would increase and the people with the old technology will be pushed out of mining in theory.
Whoever will make faster chip will produce them and sell and earn profit. They will not bother with paying electricity, mine Bitcoins and sell them and ...
They will just sell as much as possible to whoever will want to take them.
This:
The only people who might still make a profit, will be the people with the cheap electricity or those who has some sort of edge over the rest.
Will still be the case in the future. It's basically the fundamental premise to make profits with mining... good price of electricity (cheap) and competitive hashrate. If there is some kind of technical leap the market will adapt, but it should follow moore's law anyway so I dont see any catastrophic scenareos with this.
The only people who might still make a profit, will be the people with the cheap electricity or those who has some sort of edge over the rest.
Will still be the case in the future. It's basically the fundamental premise to make profits with mining... good price of electricity (cheap) and competitive hashrate. If there is some kind of technical leap the market will adapt, but it should follow moore's law anyway so I dont see any catastrophic scenareos with this.
natural evolution of bitcoin
What do you have against the Chinese? I live in China (sort of) and I trust them more than I trust the westerners.
Not exactly against China, but the fact that most of the hashrate of the whole network is distributed among the Chinese people. OP is thinking of this as some sort of centralization, which might be the case if more and more people left due to price stagnation together with the upcoming block reward halving. We all know that most parts of China have cheap electricity, and also mining farms are strategically placed on areas which can help cool the mining equipment without having to rely with additional power. With that said, the big mining farms in China is likely to stay in the mining scene due to their profitability, whereas other farms which can't keep up with the cost is likely to leave.
There are other large farms in the world. Last I heard, BitFury has data centers in Finland and Iceland. China may have the largest concentration of farms but they're not the only ones. The only place in the world server farms should not exist is in the totalitarian states of america. The Chinese businessmen would never allow a fork to happen because that would separate them from their profit. If the Chinese government were to ever come down on Bitcoin, watch how fast that equipment relocates to another part of the world. Much ado about nothing.
There are farms in Iceland and Finland too, also strategic locations in which electricity costs can be cut down due to the natural cooling already available on those areas. China has the most number of farms, I think, and the largest pool in the world is located there too, so that adds up to the centralization factor in terms of mining. China has the edge to mine and hash with profit even if other farms leave the mining scene.
Quote
The only place in the world server farms should not exist is in the totalitarian states of america.
I couldn't agree more on this particular line.
We already know the Chinese miners have a advantage over other miners in the world, namely cheaper electricity.
We also know that the halving will happen in 2016 and most miners will struggle to make a profit and they will quit mining, if the price of Bitcoin do not increase with the halving.
The only people who might still make a profit, will be the people with the cheap electricity or those who has some sort of edge over the rest.
This already happened when ASIC's were introduced, and most CPU/GPU solo miners left the mining scene, because they could not stay profitable and compete with the people
who used the ASIC's.
Let's say this does happen, and we are left with one nation or geographical area dominating the mining scene, will this not be seen as centralization and a possible weak point?
Another scenario could be, where say Finland create some sort of new ASIC chip or new technology that is capable of doing much more calculations and they then decide not
to export it to other nations and just dominate the mining scene. The difficulty would increase and the people with the old technology will be pushed out of mining in theory.
Do you perceive this as a possible threat? Or just the natural evolution of Bitcoin?
We also know that the halving will happen in 2016 and most miners will struggle to make a profit and they will quit mining, if the price of Bitcoin do not increase with the halving.
The only people who might still make a profit, will be the people with the cheap electricity or those who has some sort of edge over the rest.
This already happened when ASIC's were introduced, and most CPU/GPU solo miners left the mining scene, because they could not stay profitable and compete with the people
who used the ASIC's.
Let's say this does happen, and we are left with one nation or geographical area dominating the mining scene, will this not be seen as centralization and a possible weak point?
Another scenario could be, where say Finland create some sort of new ASIC chip or new technology that is capable of doing much more calculations and they then decide not
to export it to other nations and just dominate the mining scene. The difficulty would increase and the people with the old technology will be pushed out of mining in theory.
Do you perceive this as a possible threat? Or just the natural evolution of Bitcoin?
According to me this scenarios are a good imagination but nothing else.
First scenario that suppose that Chinese can dominate the scene of mining cannot be known because the technology can invent things (minings hardware) that can overcome the cheap electricity of the firsts. So the other miners will not go out of mining. This is most probable to be true according to me than your first supposition.
The same with the second scenario. Why must be only Finland that will create this hardware? Have no arguments about this. There are to many the businesses which produce hardware for mining and are no reason's that those cannot invent mining hardware less good than Finland.
So, as a conclusion your fear, I think, it is without bases and you must remain sure that no one of your supposed things cannot happen.
Jump to: