in short
costs of mining. involvement of mining. vs cost of buying coin. is variable depending on hashrate and how many asics and cost of asics.

now the reason why hashrate is an important indicator.
if people can buy coin cheaper than mining costs they will.. (bringing price up until corrected equilibrium)
if people can mine cheaper than buying coin they will.. (bringing price down until corrected equilibrium)
if miners can reduce cost to mine (cheaper rigs) they will sell (bringing price down until corrected equilibrium)
if miners have more competition(more hashpower/more cost) if mining cost more than price they will buy coin(until equilibrium)

which is all about "corrections" of speculation spikes and dips

people will always find the best way to get bitcoin. which is why the base VALUE of bitcoin circles around the mining cost.

its complicated psychology and math. which is why i tried to not fill in all the math and psych.

but right now at ~40exa the value AREA is:
very limited users can profit at bottom($3600)      however based on who has rigs($4600-$6100)
emphasis very limited amount of people can break even at $3600.
........
to get a baseline value of $1500 again the hashrate would be down at 16exahash and everyone would need to be using the latest efficient asics.
........

ill try to make it simple for people to calculate an indicator, and understand it all

take the current exahash (eg 40~)multiply by 89
(i done the math to make it simple as multiply by 89)
this 89 is based on current hardware costs IF ALL asics were next gen
hense baseline(bottom)

and the electric was 5cents/kwh and the hardware was 950 spread over a year. then the math of how many asics is required to hash a block. and divide it down to the costs and the costs per ptc

and thats the cost of mining and the baseline multiple to indicate base value .
big point. its the BASE multiple. THE LOW.

i say baseline because some are using S9(14thash 1.3kwh) at that exa multiple of 111 cost (each asic was $450 bought)
i say baseline because some are using S9(14thash 1.3kwh) at that exa multiple of 154 cost (each asic was $850 bought)
i say baseline because some are using S9(14thash 1.3kwh) at that exa multiple of 280 cost (each asic was $2000 bought)
i say baseline because some are using t15(28thash 1.6kwh) at that exa multiple of 89 cost (each asic was $950 bought)


a month ago the multiple was 111(bottom),
a couple month ago was 135 (mix)
a couple month ago was 154 (mix)
6 months-1year it was 280. (top)
(this 111 multiple was the base line for 12 months as that was the bottom cost of the last gen asics)

not everyone has such low cost of mining of the next gen 89 multiple. but some of the farms do. so an amount of influencers that can move price will be around that 89 multiple.
(they can sell down to the value of say 40exa * 89 and still break even profit)

after all
if a person can SELL bitcoin at profit for than mining it. they will.
but not everyone can because not all miners are at the 89 base multiple

but due to next gen asics the multiple is moving down to 89. (yep outsiders/hobbiests are not getting deliveries until last week of december, but yep some facilities are already using them.. (and manufacturers are cough cough profitably quality assurance testing hardware before december delivery to users))
so the value is not yet at the 89 multiple .. but the bottomline is a multiple of 89 of the exahash

i was hoping to see hashrate raise and lockout at above 60exa before the next gen release. but seem last month before the price drama. we seen them curve down the hashrate

........

the only reasons a fork suppresses adoption is that instead of 1000's of developers and businesses concentrating on one coin. they get diluted down to less concentrating on one network

imagine if coinbase, circle, bitpay concentrated all its efforts on promoting bitcoin adoption, instead of multicoin adoption
imagine all the exchanges that didnt just add random altcoin every week
imagine VC funding concentrated at multiple teams, businesses that only concentrate on bitcoin

but thats in a utopia where most devs actually innovate if they were to concentrate on one network...
rather than herd sheep into different fields (develop and promote different networks) where better grass is promised. but turn to mud within a short period

many countries around the world i have seen, look at bitcoin. see its initial promise of 2009-2013 and then see the situation of today. and decide its easier, cheaper and better to just play with an altcoin than to try to fight off all the lobbying of centralisation happening in bitcoin

pretty much its a spiral. making it harder to get into bitcoin. newbies to use something else. newbies try something else thus not expand bitcoin.. then old bitcoiners that were using bitcoin decide to also join the 'something else' thus less use bitcoin

1. first of all you trusting a team does not give reason to only have one. infact trusting a team and denying an option for more than one team is centralisation at its essense.
nothing wrong with you trusting one team. but denying other teams as an option is not decentralisation
oh and...
core announced a mega bug in their code that would DDos all core node at once running 0.14+ just a month ago.

2. oh your are mentioning the consoles have to connect to a server.. that again is echos of pools and centralisation..
this topic seems to sound less and less like a decentralisation effort. and more so just a way to sell games consoles..

3. within days of releasing consoles that can mine. someone with $10000 would buy a 50 consoles and hook them up as a pool
within a week someone with $1m will hook up 5000 consoles as a pool. and within a month you would see bigger investors with enough stock to have 500,000 consoles linked up as a pool. thus. all the idea of 'console' mining is doing is causing hashrate drama for a month before its back to usual of pool mining again.

4. oh and even PoS is becoming pooled. so dont think that console mining will be distributed for long, because PoW and PoS will always end up being pooled once it meets a certain threshold of greed/need.

think about it if a block is 12.5btc($63k) but only one 1 winner every 10 minutes. as soon as lets say 1million people want to mine. each user has to wait for "luck" of between 1-1mllion blocks to get $63k
they will naturally prefer to increase the odds and get a more regular income by pooling rather that a one in 20 year chance for just a one time win of $63k

5. people have already planned out putting a single asic chip into a LED WIFI controlled light bulb. thinking 'every house can mine'. problem was that other people already planned to snip off the LED filament end. and just have a rach of the asic bulb screw ends running

^ here is your issue

meaning the rest of your topic post is about DISTRIBUTION not decentralisation.
imagine a bug needing a recall of devices. or a firmware update. if everything is core then the recall/update ends up coming from a single central point

its the same as demanding all computers only run microsoft

heres where i had some success

1. in your local area, form a meetup where people can discuss bitcoin.
2. ask them which small/independent retailers/services they use and try to find a common retailer/service you all use
3. find out who is good at speaking, who is a regular bitcoin buyer

now the simple part. agree on a upfront tab. (like a bartab)
go to the manager of the retailer/service and tell them at no cost to the retailer he can accept a new payment method and get free advertising.

now here is how it works

1. give the retailer /service a upfront bar tab in fiat. and a QR code of the guy thats a regular bitcoin buyer
2. tell the retailer/service that if any of the staff are asked if the customer can pay in bitcoin. say yes
3. demonstrate to the manager how to use a fiat/bitcoin calculator.
4. then show how the retailer just needs to sell the goods normally as cash on his system. but instead of asking for cash from the customer display the QR code and ask for the amount of BTC calculated.
then put the cash from the bartab into the cash register.
5. contact the town/city news/media and tell them you have a news story about a local retailer being the first retailer of your town/city to accept bitcoin.. and let them do all the leg work of interviewing and releasing the news locally

now here is why it works
1. the retailer has cash upfront. so no loss, no cost, no hassle, no risk to the retailer. confidence to give it a try is achieved
2. you already know a few bitcoiners will use that retailer so you know the retailer will notice the 'business' gained
3. shows how simple it is to ask for a amount of bitcoin
4. the regular bitcoin buyer will become the guy that refills the bartab while getting the btc from the retailer displaying his QR
5. media love a story about bitcoin at the moment. its one of their buzzwords that spark public interest so they will promote the business

you dont need to baffle the manager with techno-waffle. just show him the money, show him a bitcoin conversion calculator and hand him a QR code. thats it.

as time goes on the manager has time to learn about bitcoin and learn about the deflationary benefit of holding bitcoin. and may even decide to just run it himself without the regular buyer needed. thus cutting out the middleman conversion.

LN's latest concept.. factories. or as i call it FORTKNOX

onchain:  
  user (8decimal bitcoin) -> factory address(8decimal bitcoin)

offchain:
  factory(12decimal bitcoin(cant broadcast)) -> USER CHANNEL(12 decimal)
  user channel(12decimal) -> co-signers factoryoutput(12 decimal)
                                     -> users factoryoutput(12 decimal)

when settling tx is handed back to factory and agregates who is owed what based on the offchain it gets back
and the factory then either
creates a broadcastable tx that the factory signs
  factory(8decimal) -> users onchain personal address(8decimal)
                           -> co-signer onchain personal address(8decimal)
                           -> factories onchain personal address(8decimal) - (for his cut/commission)

or creates another offchain tx to go to another channel open session without needing to broadcast
   factory(12decimal bitcoin(cant broadcast)) -> USER CHANNEL(12 decimal)

in short factory own the value and let people play with 12decimal promises
.. some may think its a good idea. but remember what happened to gold when banks asked people to vault up the gold and play with promissory notes(bank notes)

end result. people were then told gold was to heavy to handle(devs usage of 'weight' is no coincidence instead of size)
so play with some copper and brass(altcoins) in the 19th-20th century

LN is a separate network that allows multiple coins to be broadcast in and out of. so expect factories to refuse to sign broadcasting btc transactions onchain and instead promote swapping for alts as the only exit to LN.

LN devs are paid by bankers. dcg.co/portfolio/#b     (blockstream)

anyway, back to the topic

to those that do want to learn about full nodes. research
NODE_NETWORK, NODE_BLOOM, NODE_WITNESS, NODE_NETWORK_LIMITED (1037)

doomad yet again avoiding the topic to poke the bear into a personal social drama...
ill bite.

my mind set is MULTIPLE teams able to operate without the REKT campaigns of core or nothing

my mindset is where if core want to be REFERENCE. then thats meant as having code for CURRENT ruleset. to allow people to have a stable source so others can make their own clients....
........not to be the rule changer source which the code changes daily
........not to insult teams who do take core code
........not to say its a breach of copyright to use core code
........not to use core code, alter it and put in features core doesnt like and get rekt by core people

but hey doomad doesnt understand the technicals which is why he just loves the personal attacks. he has had months to learn and do research, yet has insultingly been very vocal that he wishes to refuse to do research.

im guessing he will play the victim of personal attack, but he is the one poking the bear. so cant cry when the bear bites back

anyway, if he thinks im authoritarian
show me some code that i created that mandated or demanded core do something or get chucked off the network.
then show some code where cores bips mandate and demand non core clients do something or get thrown off the network...

guess which code only exists... which proves who is the authoritarian

again my mindset(OPINION NOT CODE, thus NO TYRANNY from me) is multiple teams to be allowed to run on the network without cores code blocking and knocking them off the network due to it not wanting to follow cores roadmap

..
the funny part is doomad cannot separate the idea that core should not BE bitcoin. but instead core should only participate in bitcoin.
but doomad will pretend to flip flop in and out of that.. one day he says core do have control without needing community permission. next he will say the community would give permission for core to activate.. he just cant make up is mind.

anyway
breaking bitcoin and breaking the fungibility of the coin. and the security of immutability just for proof of life of one person. is as stupid as saying destroy all retirement funds from the 1953 to 1977 just to see if elvis is still alive.

here is something even simpler

to avoid affecting btc
whoever has the private keys can easily move coins of forks.

now here is the funny part that disproves craig wright.
his "trust" is just a file of PUBLIC addresses for BTC.
so if it was a real trust and if he did have the private keys.. he could freely move those forked coins as they are not part of the trust, (which he uses as the excuse to not move them)

so yea
move the forked coins and it wont affect btc or any other excuses not to move btc. because its not moving BTC...

with all that said. my point is. prices of speculation and manipulation correct back around the mining cost value line when there is low speculation and low manipulation.

this is because miners if they can
buy bitcoin cheaper than their mining cost. they will buy it
sell bitcoin profiting above their mining cost. they will sell it

mining farms have private OTC deals with VC's and whales to contractually mine and give coin to them at certain rates. so if they see opportunity to buy/sell coin and profit on the markets to then fulfil the OTC contracts. they will.

thus if the price dips too much. they buy on the market. (bringing price up) if they see profit on the market they will. which fights off the manipulators/speculators to bring in corrections back close to their costs

now i see no reason for $1500.. because the costs of mining is not that low
now i see no reason for $1500.. because the trader support (70%+ of UTXOs moved above $5800)
now i see no reason for $1500.. because the pric only moved $400 below the support.. not $4000

trading alone. if mining was not involved could speculate the price randomly.
all the way up/ all the way down

but if you actually calculate the mining costs. (averaging out the "luck" of who wins vs their hashpower vs their cost of hardware & electric)

you will see the line of resistance. which the traders always bounce back to at a correction of speculation/manipulation

EG yea may 2017 had a mining cost of above $1200 so i can see why may 2017 had a $1.3-$2k*
(again why specifically $1.5 of May 4th??.. why May at all?? why 2017 at all?? )

and if you check the charts. the main players are mining farms. they dont react. they influence
check out the hashrate chart and you will see the curve.(a few blurred vision people deny the curve)


this curve is where new ASICS are being cough tested out cough (making money).
swapping old for new more efficient miners

i also marked the date(red circle 14th-15th october) at which they decided not to push the hashrate too much and actually bring the hashrate down while also using boost to stay mor efficient and still win blocks. which was 14th-15th OCTOBER.. before the altcoin drama.. (awhole month before before price movements)

as you can see by the red circle it was the last day the hashrate average tipped 60exa and the first day of october it went below 45exa

which shows it was not altcoin drama caused. because the altcoin drama didnt start until just a few days ago(mid november.. a month later).
mining farms do not react to price/altcoin drama(only small hobbiests do). because the miners were instead doing stuff a month before the price. and so now have cheaper hardware to be able to sell coin cheaper this month than they did before last month

*https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitcoin/historical-data/?start=20170501&end=20170528

more boring social drama
1. altcoins are not the cause
2. th number of $1.5k is a random pulled out of thin air number . that has nothing backing that number, no math, no stats, no reason for that particular number... thus its just a meaningless target set by someone random

all in all im thinking its some dude that just wishes he could have bought in at $1500 in 2017. missed his chance and now is praying for it to go that low.
without realising the stuff that went into the ~$6k range for 12 months
also the 12 month value line was $5800.. todays price is $5500.. only a $300 varience.. so thinking that the price is going to panic down by $4000 drop.. purely because of a $300 dip below the 12 month support... really is pushing too hard to sway the social drama sheep

lol your soo funny.

the event happened august 2017... so use your eyes. dont use live data for a historic event thats already passed

its like politics.  recent stats show that tories polled the population and lost.
but history shows they passed the election
(using live data to explain history, just doesnt work)

history shows that when you were 1yo you wore a nappy. yep today you could show you have accepted that wearing boxers is to be expected. but doesnt mean that you didnt wear a nappy in the past.

yea i know what ur thinking. what does ur history of being a baby have to do with it.. well thats the point, you being a baby has nothing to do with bitcoin

how about go look at the stats of 2017..

oh and um yea.. people may update their nodes now because there now nothing to lose or gain because the decision is done and over with a year ago.. but if you look at the last 12 months of UXTO movements. segwit is no where near majority. majority of people just aint using it. even after a year.. yep. same ~35-40%... not 80-100

even funnier even sipa is still displaying legacy addresses for his donations and tips

but as i said in other topics.. stop meandering to turn things into social drama..

the topics is about someone saying about possibility of the end of bitcoin.
i mentioned about bitcoin, what could end it(being number 1). and craig

if you dont like it. ignore me and move on.

25% ina couple days.. the price was never high $7k range a few days ago..

as for too late to sell lol
the price remained at above $5800 for an entire 12 months... pretty much to the day prices have been above $5800
check out the chart from mid november 2017 to mid november 2018

12 months to sell above $5800

anyway. the price is only $5500 so only a few hundred below the 12 month bottomline. so not much risk.
all i would say is buy some cheap coins before things move back into the above $5800 range again. because many have been screaming for some good discount days. so here is an oppertunity

not to do with BCH

it was VC investment from last year that had a 12month contract to hold.
they finally got to sell this year.
also pools are using more efficient ASICS this month so can afford to sell coins cheaper.

craig right and others knew this.

craig just planned some social drama and forked a coin that wont last. and is just telling a story that he is the cause..
he is just trying to take credit and pretend he is a influencer. even though his coin has no impact on btc.

EG the price didnt drop at last years august event which was more directly linked to btc. so its un related to a fork of a fork that has no utility and is there just for dramatic effect

what you should consider is. before just grabbing and script kiddy copy and paste code.
read the code and ask yourself does your altcoin need the new code.

you could just:
continue using the old version, thus nothing changes. and your chain just does the same thing it always had
or
manually write in new code into your old client that includes a new feature, thus keeping the mining functions.
or
code back in the mining function into a new version

schnorr is not to increase throughput
its actually when people no longer just do legacy transactions due to high fee's and instead need to use multisigs for LN. schnorr is there to attempt to shrink the bloat of (in the future) more popular used multisigs, which would reduce tx/block if schnorr was not used.

EG
imagine average tx was 250byte
multisig was 500byte

when multisig becomes more popular. LESS transactions could fit.
(easy math. legacy=upto 4k.. multisig only 2k)

so schnorr reduces the tx bytes to bring it down to the utility to normal legacy levels.. not to increase scaling.. just prevent decrease.

open a spreadsheet and do some math.

community didnt choose.
remember your love for "compatible" nodes. that dont need to upgrade.
that does not mean consensus occured, that means consensus got by passed as it didnt require an opt-in to vote yes
again you love that the core didnt need permission. you said it many times.
you spend a month yammring on about it.. no point continuing your "trust a dev campaign"

anyway
long story short.
craig and ver are just social dramatists and its real funny how some people want to avert peoples gaze away from real influencers (Devs and investor ownership control)
all this social drama stuff seems to just want to distract people away from the real causes of events in the hope it sends sheep to sleep long enough to not realise the real changes being made that really affect the bitcoin network

nope bitpay and coinbases influence was due to having owners DCG.CO

DCG want LN (an independant network) for multiple coins.
they paid blockstream to invent segwit.. community said no from november 16-summer 17
so they paid BLOQ for segwitx2. they paid samson mow, luke jr and others for UASF to push segwit through as mandatory

if you follow the money you will see it.
ver and wright are just social face drama. and not actual influencers
which again is why i find it funny that fingers get pointed as such drama queen, instead of people actually being aware of the reality.

nope. i promote bitcoin. but i will discredit developers who wish to mess negatively with the bitcoin network
you know.
the devs that say bitcoins blockchain cant scale
the devs that backtrack out of consensus
the devs that chang code for personal benefit while ignoring community wishes

if you separate certain devs from the term "bitcoin" and see the concern for the network vs devs. you will understand that i am promoting the network but discrediting certain devs.

its these devs that have caused the issues such as onchain scaling delays, fee wars and other things.

remember devs are temporary, devs are replacable. there is no point defending a dev and letting them mess with the network because you want to "trust a dev" that just shows you care more for a dev than for the network

highlighting the issues the network has is not discrediting it.
its to raise awareness and to hope people wake up and start being concerned about the network issues to hopefully try to push it to get them sorted. to improve bitcoin..

but hey. those that play the "hug and defend a dev" games will always continue to distract people from the real causes of issues and point fingers to social dramatists as the cause