Bitcoin Forum

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1518518.msg15373900#msg15373900

You can't prove how many people weren't mining with stolen cloud computing as I pointed out:


Monero and Bitcoin can never prove their distribution was any more fair than any other.

Sorry. Monero has no more "holier than thou" bullshit excuse for their lack of leadership and rapid development.

---

I think even a cursory glance over this forum section will make your position re: Monero abundantly clear by now as you can't help but to crosspost your opinion about that project in every troll or non troll thread.

Are you planning on going back to coding anytime soon? Or will you continue spending your energy in expressing your disgust?
They might or might not have a lack of leadership, but you are most certainly lacking any form of mature self control at the moment.

I understand. But I think my burst here based on a new insight about proof-of-work not being any more provably fair, that no one has written about before, justifies making sure that enough readers are aware of this new way of thinking about fairness of altcoins.

And Monero has bullshitted everyone so much with their dogma, I think it is justified to make it front page news, when all their dogma is revealed to be bullshit.

They should focus on telling the truth, which is they are an anonymity technology token. Period. Until that changes.

They stop the bullshit. And I go coding. Deal?

Not a deal I am able to entertain, sorry. You can control yourself but I am unable - and unwilling - to control some random people on the internet. besides. I'm a nobody.
I like most of what I see from the Monero community, for some I care less, for some I care more. Just as in real life.

You will have to find more suitable partner for that agreement.  ;)

Over and out, sleep is healthy :p

Edit: For what it's worth, your video made you very sympathetic. I just don't get that periodical raging bull mode. I also think you are barking up the wrong tree, but that is my personal opinion and not worth discussing as you won't convince me otherwise and I won't convince you.

I don't like promotional dogma (i.e. lies & deception masquerading as idealistic), bullshit, and lack of complete solutions that could actually make a difference.

If they were more humblehonest and admitted they were just trying to make anonymity with a proof-of-work launch, and not try to claim greater lies such as "the only fairly launched, fungible cash", etc.., then I wouldn't dislike them.

Why do you not simply argue that Moenro's POW is unfair because it discriminates against Americans in favor of Canadians? Furthermore even within the same Canadian province there is also discrimination since those who live in Prince George BC like myself, have an unfair advantage over those who live in Victoria BC. As for those who live in any part of Africa they are really discriminated against. Then there is also religions discrimination. The economics of mining Monero are very different in say Vatican City and Makkah. Jerusalem is somewhere in between.

Fairness has nothing to do with uniformity (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1526067.msg15364822#msg15364822).

The weather creates an uneven playing field https://www.wunderground.com (https://www.wunderground.com)

Yes the Butterfly Effect impacts everything. But if anything you are supporting the position that it doesn't matter which method of distribution is employed. So why are you arguing against Monero's "only proof-of-work is fair" doctrine?

My point is that the distribution can have some mathematically provable bounds on insider ownership (my plan), so some people may judge this is more or equivalently trustless (i.e. worthy) as a proof-of-work launch. Others may have a different opinion.

And my point is Monero can't use that dogma to claim they are provably more fairly distributed.

First of all, there is no point in comparing Monero's distribution method or that of any coin for that matter with your proprietary secret sauce. As far as I am concerned, your proprietary secret sauce has zero value until people can use it. That means you will have to reveal it and run the risk that someone will copy it and not pay you for your intellectual property, As far as what is already there in the market when it comes to fairness Monero's POW is among the best.

You can't prove that. How many people weren't using stolen cloud mining accounts as I already explained upthread.

You can't just make up bullshit without proof, math, and a white paper.

Are you sure you are actually an academic  ???

I do not need to. It is you that is making the claim that it is not, and proving a negative is even harder. What I have already done is disprove your assertion that POW mining is equivalent to paying the utility companies for electricity. That is why the weather is so critical.

Edit: In another context I would agree than my claim requires proof; however give the title of this thread "My rebuttal to the fairness of proof-of-work launch (Monero's holier than thou)" my claim is valid since the onus is on the OP to prove his assertion not on the rest of use to disprove it.

You can't make any claim about proof-of-work launch distribution being more fair, unless you can prove that you know how much hashrate was produced using stolen cloud mining accounts (and other ways of cheating the fairness).


I am not required to prove there was no stolen cloud mining accounts involved in mining. You have to prove the negative. You got that part backwards.


You have presented no proof of anything. When the white paper is ready, please reply.

Thanks for promoting theft. Thanks for promoting the force of viral communist Copyleft licenses. Thanks for all the dogma you've been destroying the altcoin ecosystem with.

Now please go away!

You can't justify IPOs due to what I said here, you're just recreating the Federal Reserve:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1524286.msg15337113#msg15337113

You still have not answered my rebuttal to your claim "POW mining is equivalent to paying the utility companies for electricity". It is you who drew your gun first and fired wide. Now I get to shoot. You Americans should understand this.

Edit 1: One does not need a mathematical proof or a white paper for something that should be obvious: Such as In many cases it makes economic sense to run an electric space heater when it is -40 C or F outside.

Edit 2: Maybe you slipped on the ice.  ;)

I am not promoting theft, just telling it like it is. By the way I guess you will not be able to participate in the stock market, which is the heart of capitalism, since every major stock exchange uses software with "viral communist Copyleft licenses" The licenses were inspired by and to a large degree written by this guy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman). Furthermore  you also may not want to use Windows 10 because Microsoft has rewritten the Windows kernel in order to run the GNU toolchain on top of Windows. https://blogs.windows.com/buildingapps/2016/03/30/run-bash-on-ubuntu-on-windows/ (https://blogs.windows.com/buildingapps/2016/03/30/run-bash-on-ubuntu-on-windows/).

Edit: I do not condone software piracy. Furthermore I have on more than one occasion identified software piracy and provided cost effective alternatives that eliminated the "theft of intellectual property".  ;)

I have no clue what the fairest distribution is but the best (I would guess) would be an equal amount distributed to everyone and I have no clue how this could be accomplished and then there is of course an emission of that same amount being distributed to those born and whether it should be destroyed at death or not as well as what percentage should be put aside for the eco system. There is no perfect distribution and probably never will be. BTC's certainly was not fair but it is what it is, it's all in degree's of fairness. No-one complains about BTC's distribution and the job of alts is to find a acceptable to the masses distribution method and those do not include scams as they are always found out.

I did not continue to mine XMR on release (I stopped after 2 days) because I could tell there was too many coins than should have been. I have never been one to say it is the fairest distribution and I haven't noticed it being a selling point supporters are using. I've seen the argument that all the crippled miner coins have all been dumped out of the system by now and I believe this to be true. Now Shit coins like DRK were the worst possible distribution (and bytecoin for that matter) with the relaunch and out right lie about another relaunch which stopped most of us from mining it on the second launch only to have evan bribed by a large mining pool the next day. And all these premined coins are nothing more than money grabs. POw does seem to be the best method even if a percentage is gamed by illegal hash with  percentage going to a coins eco-system, what that percentage should be again I have no clue. I also have no clue how a continuous flow of Dev funds should be managed so as not to be gamed but since we are talking about fair distribution I would say that is a best case.

It looks like in your excitement after coming up with a partial rebuttal to one part of a sentence you have missed the context, an unwitting strawman.

The context was that instead of funding development and the ecosystem, the miners are now funding something else. That something else can be electric power industry shareholders and/or hardware manufacturers like NVIDIA and AMD for example. Furthermore, people who can't use miners to heat their houses can't compete with those who can which causes even more centralization and unfair market condition.

Or perhaps the solution to fair distribution and funding development you're suggesting is to move all the devs to the north so they can get free coins while heating up their houses?

How many times have I pointed out that using electricity for heating is not economic. We use carbon based fuels for heating. There is an orders-of-magnitude difference in efficiency. If you are a Physicist and don't know this, I am flabbergast.

You can ignore reality if you wish.  Take a pure carbon fuel such as coal. The efficiency of a coal fired power plant is upwards of 30% in some cases 40%. The efficiency of a coal fireplace as a source of heat maybe 5%. I used to live in the UK where coal was commonly used to heat homes even in the 1970's It is been phased out because it is so inefficient.

Edi 1t: Repeating the same erroneous statement over and over again does not make it correct. Here is Canada there is a large number of residences and businesses that are heated with electricity. Furthermore even if one were to use a fuel such as natural gas, it still has a cost and if that cost is displaced by the POW mining operation, this an economic advantage that only works if the mining is decentralized. All of this is basic thermodynamics.

Edit 2: You are also ignoring cooling and air conditioning costs. Setting the value of the heat produced as a by product of POW mining to zero makes zero economic sense. The heat produced has a positive or negative value that depends on the weather. It also depends on the heating needs of the miner. If one produces more heat that is needed to heat one's home then there is no or negative value on the excess heat. This is where that small player can have high advantage since scaling to a larger POW mining operation actually increases the per unit cost.

does it matter its where we wanna be, lets burn some powow and make sure there is plenty of electricity :)

like a business, i install it, you get heat i mine coins? IoT ? lots of buildings have no choice/not allowed, plenty of people dont care also

Natural gas is 1/3 the cost of electric heating:

http://homeguides.sfgate.com/comparing-cost-gas-furnace-vs-electric-heater-61395.html

So if someone is using electric heating, then it is because the cost is irrelevant to them. Thus mining a CC to recover a small fraction of that cost is ludicrous. Remember the mining farms near hydroelectric power (or free subsidized electricity alleged in China) will eliminate any possibility of getting much income from your residential mining rig.


Exactly. Come on man, up your game to producing well researched white papers and stop throwing these poorly contemplated theories at me. I find I am often wasting time rebuking these half-baked concepts that you haven't really thought out well.

By your own figures you are still reducing the mining cost by 33%, the cost of the natural gas, so ignoring this does not make economic sense. As to whether natural gas or electric heat is the better option there are a host of issues above the cost of the energy it self. two major ones are:
1) Capital cost are higher with natural gas
2) With electric heat is easy target specific areas rather than the whole house, business etc. This is where electric heat can have big gains over natural gas.
My point remains. As long as electric heat is part of the equation there is the opportunity for 100% savings. If it is not then the savings can range from 25% to 70%. or more

Edit 1: Here is an example at http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2012/1207/Cheapest-way-to-heat-your-home-Four-fuels-compared/Natural-gas-1-024 (http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2012/1207/Cheapest-way-to-heat-your-home-Four-fuels-compared/Natural-gas-1-024) Natural gas comes in at 78% of the electricity cost.

Edit 2: About the only case where you could have a case is passive solar heating; however even there can be a small electrical component.

ArticMine you entirely didn't address my point that if marginal cost of mining one CC token is $600 (yet the mining farms such a 21 Inc. project a $8 cost for themselves), then if suddenly millions are mining to pay some portion of their electric bill, then the market price of the CC token is going to fall down closer to the actual cost of production $8 because those are millions of sellers (if they don't sell, they don't lower then electric bill).

Mining equipment has a capital cost also. If they are unwilling to pay the capital cost for natural gas, why would they be willing to pay capital cost for mining equipment to lower then electric bill by less than switching to gas will.

Besides, once we turn mining into a race to consume the most electricity in the most ways possible, then it means we will drive the electricity costs of producing a transaction up to the value of a transaction, because block rewards decline to the miniscule tail reward (or 0 in Bitcoin's case), so the only revenue remaining are the transactions.

This is 21 Inc's strategic mistake also. I have a design that will render all of 21 Inc's plans uneconomic.

What you are describing here is a new generation of ASIC that has a 75x efficiency advantage over the previous generation. Even in this case the old ASIC is still competitive in the 100% electric heating case since 1) The old ASIC has zero capital cost since it has already being depreciated and 2) There is zero effective electricity cost.

The real issues here are
1) The builders of the ASICs are also the operators of the ASICs
2) The Bitcoin at 1MB block size is too small relative to the Bitcoin 10 min block time. This allows 1) above to happen, by minimizing the impact of the Great Firewall of China.
3) The whole POW mining algorithm in Bitcoin is broken regardless of how Bitcoin is mined, since the emission in Bitcoin will go to zero over time. We can debate forever how Bitcoin will fail over this, but I understand that we are in agreement that this will cause the eventual failure of Bitcoin. Even with fixed 1 MB blocks I fail to see how the "fee market" in Bitcoin is supposed to work.

Incorrect. Do the math. You entirely ignored the main point of my prior post.

Any way it is pointless because unprofitable PoW is coming... so it is pointless for me to debate what will be deprecated later this year.

I said in the 100% electric heat case not the natural gas case.

If 11.7 cents of electricity only nets 1 cent of income, it is pointless.

If 11.7 cents of electricity nets 11.7 cents worth of heat plus 1 for cent of income for 12.7 cents total it is not pointless. Why do you have such difficulty understanding what the free market is saying? There are situations where it makes economic sense to  operate an electric space heater. As long as these things are sold, and people buy them and operate them, then my case stands.  

It is pointless because it is a pita. Why bother. As I pointed out, all your global neighbors will compete with you for that 1 cents, so it declines asymptotically towards 0.

You don't seem to understand economics at all. Please learn about the essential Economics 101 term "opportunity cost".

I don't think I should be required to give remedial course in Economics 101. Perhaps it has been decades since you took that course and need a refresher.

Actually what is pointless is this entire debate. You started a thread about Monero's launch, and Monero is currently mined with CPUs and GPUs. So what is even the point of arguing what will happen when the latest generation of Bitcoin, ASIC miners becomes obsolete?

ArticMine doesn't correctly apply the basic Economics 101 concepts of opportunity cost (above), supply&demand, and marginal cost (below).



The bolded (my added emphasis) portion of the quote is incorrect because (if you were correct about your erroneous claim of it being economically worthwhile) then the demand for the obsolete mining equipment would rise and thus the selling price (and thus unused depreciation) would also rise. You seem to not factor into your thinking the concept of how when a good becomes newly substitutable then its supply/demand/price changes.

Once and for all, you are irrefutably rebutted: