On a serious note though, what the hell are we supposed to do?
The owner of deepbit doesn't give a shit about breaking over 50%
you need to make better pool (with at least same uptime and functionality that deepbit have) and advertise it unfortunately what we have instead is a bunch of panicking newbies spamming with shitload of dumb topics in which they want to ddos deepbit Oh, so you will happily mine away without concern of network health simply for a little extra up time and functionality? (Not to mention making less Bitcoins) (Oh, and there are other ways to mitigate the risk of a pool going down, and deepbit's functionality doesn't come close to some of the pools that have real time stats, etc.) There are some people posting in these threads that are making valid points in a polite manner. The topics aren't "dumb" because the concern is real. I'll agree with your last point, DDOS is stupid. |
|
|
|
Not to mention that each difficulty jump is another step towards the end of mining altogether.
 As long as there is Bitcoin, there is mining. |
|
|
|
What? I always sell my stocks at 1% upswing and it's working out well so far. Why do you think Mt. Gox is behind? I send like 500 transaction per day. I keep buying and then selling when it instantly goes up 1%.
I'm seeing all kinds of fluctuation!
Oh you play the noise. Nice. So you buy (and pay the .65% fee), wait until it goes up 1%, then sell (and pay the .65% fee). I knew you were bright, but this takes the cake. |
|
|
|
I make so much more bitcoins mining on deepbit! No you don't. Especially with the constant market fluctuation. By constant fluctuation do you mean: always goes up? It's better to get the coins faster and sell them then wait and possibly miss a price upswing.
When the market is always going up (as it has done so far) you are better off waiting and selling later. |
|
|
|
I'll just stick to my deepbit mining.
Lemme guess, you are from OCN and you kept your miner pointed at deepbit when they were down during the DDOS? (this is a joke, of course, just having some fun with you) (although, I bet it's true!) |
|
|
|
|
...irate Chuck Schumer grows.
|
|
|
|
|
People can see 3 days into the future?
|
|
|
|
I hope deepbit hits 100%. I would love getting a payoff for every block! Completely eliminates luck.
You can start a new private chain and mine all the Bitcoins for yourself. No luck, and no sharing. Seems like a no brainer to me. (Who's going to buy a decentralized currency that isn't decentralized?) |
|
|
|
Which is why I chose the term 'consistently.'
It may be consistent, but it isn't more. If anything it's consistently less. |
|
|
|
Thank you for saying it. Tycho is gaining 50% of the market because he has a great pool with consistent payout and features people want. Other pools could gain more users if they take a page from his book, and offer a more competitive 'product.' Most miners are in it for the money, and that's the bottom line. People are going to go where they are consistently making the most money.
There is simply no way a 3% fee pool is paying out more Bitcoins than a 0% fee pool in the long run (even with invalid insurance). It may have less variance, that is all. |
|
|
|
|
No, but last I checked making polite suggestions is fine. And network health is important to some. In fact, it should be the most important issue to a miner.
Better yet, let's play with fire. Everyone switch to deepbit. When a government decided they want to destroy this little project, where do you think they will go? When the chain is forked what do you think the investors sitting on the sidelines waiting to invest millions will do? Let's find out. Let's see how much we can trust one pool. Let's put the entire network into the hands of one man.
|
|
|
|
This has been shown in the past (when deepbit was first DDOSed the network took 50 minutes to solve 2 blocks, not good) Actually it may not be connected to the DDoS. For example, today the network had more than 40 minutes span without a single block. It would be an interesting coincidence. |
|
|
|
Lookie here random people. If there's an issue with deepbit gaining more than 50% of the hash power and controlling the network, not now, not deepbit specifically, but just in case sometime someone does that, better to find out sooner if bitocin is doomed to fail  , it doesn't matter if we all start throwing feces like mad monkeys to a person that pioneered and dedicated his working time to the betterment of this community. You don't have to be dicks about it, and vilify him just because he's popular. Do present your arguments about using other pools, in an appealing manner. Consider that even if this option is open to him, he could simply choose to ignore it and not use it, all these threads indicate that Tycho is somehow actively trying to derail the whole blockchain like a madman on purple pills. He doesn't even have the power to do so and you are already executing him for a made-up crime. Be civilized! First it's not doomed to fail. There is an actual attack that can occur with >50% of the network hash rate. There is no point to just let it go and find out if Bitcoin can withstand it when there is no reason to do so. The network will recover, no problem. What we don't know is if the public's trust will recover if such an attack were to happen. The public is important unless you think the miners can just sell Bitcoins back and forth to each other forever. Second, I agree. Let's discuss the problem like adults. Let's not call names and suggest underhanded attacks. Let's try to convince people there is a damn good reason that we want a healthy, robust Bitcoin network that doesn't rely so much on one pool. Tycho seems like an OK guy to me (although if I were in his shoes, I would limit the pool voluntarily), and he isn't even my concern. It's just unhealthy for the network. This has been shown in the past (when deepbit was first DDOSed the network took 50 minutes to solve 2 blocks, not good). |
|
|
|
Study stock splits. I'm really surprised that the community has such little background in equities, revaluation of currency or commodity. There should have been an economist at the core of this development team. BTC is already trying to pull a quantitative easing 1. But you have no board, theoretical basis or a bernank to oversee the operation. so goes anarcho capitalism.  There should be an incremental splitting, first .000, then .0000, then .0000 up to some static limit, say .000000. If there is no absolute limit the BTC will go Zimbabwe and be defunct. The splits should be well notified in advance, say 2-3 months notice, then on a certain day at a certain time all BTC go to .000. Then in the next X time frame they go to .0000 using the same process. so forth and so on. What are you talking about? No one is expanding anything. Simply moving the decimal. The current 1 Bitcoin will still be 1 Bitcoin and there won't be any more of them created by moving the decimal. Have you ever sliced up a pie? Did you end up with more pie after cutting it? No. |
|
|
|
I want to gamble it up. I want an option that has someone put up a large chunk of their money, with a small chunk of my money, and if the rate drops a little bit I lose my share but if it goes up I have bigger potential for gain. No idea what it's called, but I want it.
Leverage. |
|
|
|
|
It saddens me that the fear of government limits our freedom. I appreciate your post and I hope nothing bad comes from your involvement with Bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
|
It's good. It's simple. You mention Bitcoins, give a little description, and offer a discount. Maybe make MtGox a link so they can actually check the price? Other than that, great.
|
|
|
|
Apparently there are no rules on this forum. This is strange, because there is a button which can be used to report posts to the moderators. (Also, there are moderators.)
Good! I've used the report button for things like spam and phishing. It worked well. The moderators are doing a fine job. |
|
|
|
Why not set up a system where bounties are placed on flagging threads and posts which violate the forum rules?
Could I get a link to the forum rules? |
|
|
|
You seem to believe 'good article' means 'agree with conclusion of article'.
There isn't much about Bitcoin that's not to understand by the way, it's a simple concept, just the coding of it was hard.
No, I believe good article means someone does their homework before writing it, not just making assumption and then basing their conclusions on those assumptions. I never said Bitcoin was hard to understand, just that the author of that article doesn't. And you said, "good article exposing Bitcoin". I guess you don't agree with the conclusion, yet it still somehow "exposes" Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
