12.5 btc is released every 10mins. There is a LIMITED amount of btc that can be mined. More machines just means less btc per machine. So, it does not become more profitable to mine lol. It becomes less profitable.
And if there were MORE manufacturers, this means more machines are pre-ordered and more machines will be deployed after 2 months have passed......thats not good.
Right now, difficulty will continue to increase because pre-ordered machines from 2 months are coming online.
If Samsung were operational ans had taken orders 2 months ago, more would be deployed now.....thats not good.
I see you're still busy being a retard. Fees will supplant the block reward, so the halving won't have the disasterous effect you think it will. How did you even get involved in this space anyway, you seem too stupid to understand even a small fraction of it. |
|
|
|
The author of the article is apparently unaware that Puerto Rico is part of the U.S. He even called it a "country".
Correct. The irony would be them building all this stuff, and buying all that land only to have Puerto Rico get annexed like Hawaii, and become another state. Then their tax protections fall away, and they'll be under the same regime as mainland U.S.A. I wonder if they considered the risk of statehood when they started investing in property. I guess we'll see how that shakes out. There are no unclaimed patches of land on the Globe, and the places that are extremely arid or cold are the only patches left, and good luck trying to live there - but even those extreme examples have some kind of claim on them. The only way to be fully independent would be sea-steading, but even then the international boundaries of countries extend a considerable distance off-shore. The UK is famous for extending theirs to prevent smaller bits becoming their own sovereign nations. You'd have better luck launching into space and finding your own rock to colonize. |
|
|
|
Of course higher bitcoin prices = higher profits but u gotta be freaking retarded to assume that bitcoin price will rise 10 times this year juz because it did so last year. Past performance does not indicate future performance, period...
And if by some miracle that happens, it would be much more profitable to juz buy and hold bitcoin rather than put money into mining equipment.
Dude, there is NO CORRELATION between price and difficulty period lol. Price got pumped last year due to hype and good news from media. That seems to have died down for now.
If there is a correlation, dash price needs to be 2-3 times higher than it is now due to the difficulty's phenominal rise. Antminer D3 will then make some significant profit instead of wat it is doing now.
Bitmain isnt dumb either. They diversify to AI chips as well, not juz mining.
U gotta be nuts if u think btc can rise 10 times a year. That would make its mkt cap over 2trillion plus this year and 20 trillion next year...thats juz impossible and it will actually be posing a significant risk to financial system in just few years from now.
Do you go to a special school to be so retarded, or does it just come naturally? Difficulty is a reflection of increase in total network hashing power, which in itself is representative of substantial investment in Bitcoin. The reason you don't see the corresponding rise in other shitcoins, is because they haven't proven themselves and none have been toughened and attacked like Bitcoin has and survived. While a baby might make it across a busy highway due to sheer probability, it doesn't mean that baby-shitcoin is worth anything yet. Bitcoin is the big boy on the block, and it has not only crossed that busy highway, but at sprinting speed while onlookers take potshots at it from the nearby pedestrian walkway. So shut the fuck up about some crapcoin having high difficulty -- it isn't the same fucking thing. Which brings me to another point... MARKETCAP IS A FUCKING IDIOT MEASURING STICK You keeep fucking mentioning "marketcap" like you know something. You fucking don't. Its easy to game, and clearly plenty of shitforks and shitcoins have relied on large issuance of their tokens so they can boast large "muh marketcap" numbers. If you don't realize how some idiot in his underwear can create a shitcoin and value it at a dollar per 100 billion units, giving it an insane marketcap, then you fail basic logic and should shut the fuck up for all eternity. "Rise 10 times in a year" -- since you can't write worth two fucks, I'll use my superior deduction abilities to infer you meant "Bitcoin can't rally more than 10x in a year". Look at this chart -- https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/0*YupospXpDV3ZRkln. Stare at it, let it sink into the soft folds of your fucking walnut-brain. See the left? Its price wiggling around down to 100. See the peak? Its price after it rallied to 1,000+ That is more than 10x in a FUCKING YEAR. And even if it didn't manage that multiple, its mouth-breathing idiots like you that can't grasp the most basic fucking principles that drag down the entire space. So go to your nearest computer, buy all the shitcoins you want, and shut the fuck up. You are a complete fucking idiot -- and you're so intellectually lazy you can't even bother to type "you" for fucking "u".... get the fuck outta here with that texting shorthand shit. In short, go fuck yourself. |
|
|
|
Dude, last year, Bitcoin price went up from 800 usd to 20,000 usd to now about 10k+ usd. That is a price increase of 12-20x or so.
Did mining get 12-20x MORE profitable?
No, it didnt.
Why?
Because bitmain and other manufacturers push out so much equipment to push difficulty far far higher....
Now, wat do u think will happen when more manufacturers add to even MORE mining equipment and BIGGER difficulty increase??
Bitcoin price will need to go up 12-20x again...same as last year... to keep mining profitability sort of the same.
I dont see bitcoin rising to 120,000- 200,000 usd this year. It has stagnated for a month as it is.......
We can have a case where mining does not make money but selling miners makes money.
So much uninformed idiocy in such a small paragraph. Higher Bitcoin Prices == Bigger Profits Per Coin Total Hashrate Sum Of Mining Pool Results in ---> Proportional Share Of Block Rewards (Averaged over time, there are variances) + Transaction Fees Per Block Mined "Stagnating for a month" after rallying to an ALL-TIME FUCKING HIGH is the the usual pattern for Bitcoin, you loon. Bitcoin is up 969% from January 31st, 2017. You also realize that there seems to be a direct correlation to increases in difficulty and price? Of course not, you're too busy being an idiot. |
|
|
|
This can be a significant problem for those who use mining GPU. Network complexity will increase significantly and will make this method ineffective. The production capacity of Samsung is very great. They can significantly increase sales volumes of ASIC. This will cause a significant reduction in the profitability of mining. I think it's bad news.
Its only a problem to those pushing ASIC miners with ASICBoost. Jihan Wu is probably going to have a heart attack, and it serves him right - he's been a parasite on the back of Bitcoin for long enough. From purposefully mining empty blocks (contributing nothing back to the network, just grubbing for the block reward), to backing shitforks like BCash, he deserves a comeuppance from the juggernaut of Samsung. As for it making GPU miners unprofitable, that ship sailed a LONG time ago for Bitcoin, on other coins that are "ASIC resistant", it won't matter too much either. |
|
|
|
It seems to me that the lightning system is not ready at present for mass use. But the increase in speed of transaction confirmation is not enough. The problem of the cost of the transaction is also very important. Without cheapening the cost of bitcoin transaction cannot be used for purchases in the store.
It isn't just about speed. Anyone who has been tracking the main-net adoption of Lightning has seen that the fees are ultra-low.... did you not realize this? Its cheap as hell, which makes "Internet of Things" transactions very plausible. |
|
|
|
|
In other news, Soros is so old he farts dust, and can't wrap his ossifying neurons around a new asset class.
What does it matter what he thinks? Buffett doesn't understand it either, but it doesn't stop Bitcoin from kicking the collective asses of every asset class out there.
Dinosaurs get buried by history, adopters are the real risk-takers.
|
|
|
|
|
Coinbase is an unethical bad actor in crypto, and all the pro traders know it.
This is why there are new exchanges being launched worldwide. They see what is possible, and how to exceed Coinbase's inept handling of their markets.
Also, fees have plummeted, so the usual BCash shill talking points aren't going to hold much water. Lightning is taking hold and rendering most altcoins obsolete.
|
|
|
|
|
I'd suggest after reclaiming your coin, to shift it into something that isn't someone's personal ego project.
I guess that would leave out Ethereum, but there are other projects more worthy than this disaster.
|
|
|
|
|
Gavin should stick to twitter.
Merkle-tree pruning already exists in concept and will be used for SPV wallets on Bitcoin. In fact, the current 0.15.1 Bitcoin Core client allows you to start at arbitrary blockheights already.
This isn't anything innovative, and the fact he's supporting the short-term "fix" of larger blocks at the expense of longer-term solutions like Lightning tells me all I need to know.
Gavin is a bad actor, supporting a shitcoin. The fact he even says stupid shit like "nodes you semi-trust" shows he doesn't understand the deeper concepts. There is no trust, which is why Bitcoin works the way it does.
I expect his success to match that of Faketoshi (Craig Wright), lots of noise, nothing concrete.
|
|
|
|
And still they call themselves a "foundation" in which they will fund there own personal wallets. An inactive wallet does not give them the right to retrieve those Bitcoin for themselves to use. It is their personal property and being what they will try to do is actually stealing it. Much more what are they trying to prove in trying to get the Bitcoins of Satosho Nakamoto? If they actually succeed in doing so it will give an imbalance to Bitcoin's price becauae the supply and demand will greatly be affected.
Its a shitfork. No one on the Bitcoin blockchain will be affected. This is why Jeff Garzik is a piece of shit, because it misleads people into thinking he can tamper with the Bitcoin blockchain at will -- he isn't, just with the shitcoins on his shitfork. |
|
|
|
Have you ever stopped a minute and considered Andreas' situation thoughtfully? Is he sincere? He clearly says that he has worked for free without investing. He seems to have had a lot of debt while traveling so much. Is this plausible? Someone is strongly indebted and travels endlessly. Sorry but I used to trust him. I even bought his books. Now, after rationalising about him I no longer trust him. Even his body language is often, upon the whole, against him, thus showing that he is not genuine; he is too rigid, due to some bone or posture issues, or perhaps due to concealing some reality. His countenance is almost always stuck when he speaks. He never searches into memory, as if he does not have anything to reminisce, which may mean that he prepares everything, encyclopaedically and calculatingly. After observing him, I feel certain in saying that he is careless. I don't know why but he is not truthful. His reactions are often childishly arrogant. He is irritable and edgy because, I feel, he does not want his talk routine to be hindered.
If you believe in a successful bitcoin, please do not ascribe that to Andreas or anybody else. Things work smoothly without figureheads. Bitcoin doesn't need heralds or know-it-all bigmouth luminaries. They are generally full of shit, i.e. egotistical swashbucklers.
You are a complete fucking asshole. What were you expecting, a dancing car-salesman sleazeball that you could "believe"? I can't fathom how the way the guy stands and TALKS is your rationale for not trusting him. Andreas has shown time and time again professional candor and restraint when tackling massively polarizing topics and communicating clearly about the technology. What the fuck have you contributed? A wall of fucking text formatted like someone on a fucking booze bender? Andreas never claimed to be a figurehead for anything - that title belongs to Egoist-In-Training Roger Ver - but something tells me you are into that shit, because you exhibit such poor character judgement. |
|
|
|
|
No one is stopping women from "engaging".
Its an open-source project, the clients are free to download as is the codebase.
If they CHOOSE not to, it isn't on anyone in the Bitcoin ecosystem to have "woman engagement quotas". Just another article pushing the usual "inclusive" agenda without understanding what both genders prefer. The cherry on top is how this is supposed to "prove" its a bubble.
Hey idiots, we've been through several massive rallies and declines over the years - look at a long term chart and do some fucking research next time.
|
|
|
|
Anyone who thinks this is about blocksize should read this well-written essay. https://medium.com/@thepiratewhocantbenamed/my-thoughts-on-your-thoughts-17474d800ddaIt lays out pretty plainly why arguing for blocksize alone is a mistake. As for S2X-2, Shitforkia Revisited, its pretty plain to see its yet-another-fork-that-solves-nothing. Just like its predecessor, even if some parts are now different. Read the medium post linked above, it is highly informative about the deeper technical reasons why "muh blocksize" is a distraction. |
|
|
|
i was really worried about this when i read the thread title 'inactive wallet balances'  i was thinking initially they were applying this to bitcoin wallets but its just their own united bitcoin. meh just another fork with their specific distribution aimed an benefiting themselves And this is why Jeff Garzik is an unethical asshole. By advertising his shitfork this way, he is trying to seed fear in people that hold Bitcoin. They'll think at first glance "oh my god, I have to get this token because if I don't then I'll be INACTIVE and it will be taken from me!" But that is completely false, and Garzik knows it. Just another nail in the coffin for his lack of credibility. |
|
|
|
In other words, 99% of the people using bitcoin probably were not "active" during this period so will get nothing and the UB people will get most of it.
So really, this is like having a massive pre-mine, except you just steal them all on your fork and sit on them. Garzik is such an asshole. |
|
|
|
|
"The automobile will stay a hobbyists obsession."
I'm sure other fools in the past are guilty of saying similar things.
A major bank analyst saying bad things about Bitcoin? Oh the shock, the horror!
|
|
|
|
With the same success it is possible to steal Satoshi and with active wallets. Bitcoin is private property and nobody should be interested in an active account or not. On the other hand I don't know what effect it can have on bitcoin ever decreasing number of coins in circulation. Theoretically, someone always loses access to their coins. It is possible that unclaimed coins for 25 years can be transferred to the community Foundation but the first requirement is returned to the owner.
You do understand that the coins we're talking about is on Garzik's shit-fork, and not on the main Bitcoin blockchain, right? He can claim to move anyone's coins on his own fork, it doesn't affect Bitcoin in the slightest. |
|
|
|
Jeff "BizCoin" Garzik is at it again, eh? Well, here's the thing. You have to understand forks. I suggest Andreas video here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpeceXY1QBM (Forkology for newbies) When Jeff says he's going to "take inactive balances", what he really means is "I'm going to take a snapshot of the Bitcoin blockchain, fork the code, then move whatever coins I want on my own fork." So, when he does this, your Bitcoin is safe - you just happen to have BizCoins on Jeff's fork too. The problem with this of course is, the method he's choosing to get people to "validate" they have Bitcoins can open a whole other avenue of data-ganking and general shennanigans. I don't trust Jeff with an ice cream cone, and I sure as hell wouldn't trust him with my Bitcoins or even his forked BizCoins. The title is sensationalist garbage to make it seem like any idiot can fork the Bitcoin blockchain and make arbitrary rules affecting the main chain -- that isn't true, it only affects Jeff's shit-fork. Garzik, you're a real fucking asshole for even advertising it this way. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin.com is owned by Roger Ver, who is actively trying to wrest control of the Bitcoin ecosystem to his shitty alt-coin BCash. Posting stories from his domain is helping promote his destructive land-grab. You may want to reconsider. Better links - Opendime - https://opendime.com/Coinkite Coldcard - http://blog.opendime.com/coldcard-annoucement/ |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
