If that's true than I'm very sorry to hear about the losses. I wish that you and your wife live happily as husband and wife. Haven't you thought about adopting a kid?

For those who are interested in geopolitics..quite a sobering read:

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/06/09/america-weapons-china-00100373

My hope remains that it would not come to blows...or my upcoming (in a few years) retirement would be utterly ruined.
The question is, though, why the f-k did we de-industrialize to the extent that we did?

Well lets see, in a whole day right the entire LTC and DOGE networks bring in a total of $1.58 million dollars combined from fees and inflation (fees being utterly insignificant).

Bitcoin, from *fees alone* without any inflation brings in $1.72million dollars/day.

This means that even with inflation completely gone in Bitcoin, Bitcoin already brings in enough in fees pay for significantly more security than those two altcoins achieve essentially entirely from inflation.  (You could, for whatever it's worth substitute or even add other semi-popular altcoins to that and still be less than Bitcoin, I just used the two you suggest)

"Merged mining" is significantly undermined by the central game theory argument for mining:  The game theory argument for mining is that to mine you expend costly energy, and if your work won't end up in the longest chain (or you manage to blow up the thing you're mining) then that effort is wasted so it is in your best interest to mine honestly.  It gets some participation advantage because you can just add it on, but as we saw with namecoin the low income quickly causes parties to either no bother or not maintain their infrastructure.

In the case of merge mining if one asset has meaningful income (like dogecoin maybe has with its perpetual inflation) and the other asset does not-- like litecoin once is subsidy is depleted (unless something changes). Then only the income side has meaningful security, the non-income side does not because the attacker isn't losing much if his blocks don't end up on the longest chain or if he sets the whole thing on fire.

Maybe you can see why many Bitcoiners really dislike altcoiners.  It's usually not that they have any issue with the altcoin itself, it's because people with some kind of investment in the altcoin glibly spread misleading claims about Bitcoin in order to rationalize, justify, and promote their altcoins.  The points are seldom well justified or considered.  I'd say that a simple majority of altcoin centric arguments about Bitcoin are actually points against the altcoins if considered with a bit of care, like this one.

There may well be reasons that you could advocate ltc+doge,  but fudding Bitcoin about its ability to fund security with fees is not one of them.  If Bitcoin's *current* fee-only income isn't enough security income for your taste than you should conclude that these other coins are *currently* insecure and lack any kind of trajectory to allow them to achieve even their current level of security in the future (after all, even doges perpetual inflation effectively dilutes the mining income down to nothing over time too; just at the cost of also debasing everyone's holdings at the same time).

Argues? Where? AFAICT noise, toxicity, and attacks got so bad the discussion just *stopped*, except a bit of chatter among gadflies and navel gazers that won't ever do the work and can't manage the navigate the public politics.  Maybe you've seen some arguments among  those people, but they were only ever there to argue.  Or it's just unoriginal repetition of ideas that were thoroughly explored in 2012 (like "lets switch to scrypt and merge mine with litecoin!"), getting the responses that could have been copy and pasted from the last three times. If there was real activity you probably wouldn't notice those noise discussions arguing amongst themselves.

When I looked recently the developer chat channel logs, they now regularly go days without any comments at all, yet back in 2013 they averaged 1866 messages per day-- a day without activity would have been a shock.  That isn't argument-- argument would mean activity.  The mailing lists have been widely unsubscribed, most posts are people who've never been extensively involved in development, and just haven't received the message about how dead things are in terms of meaningful change.

Of course, (reinvoking the prior offtopic diversion) bitcoin development "dead" is still significantly more activity than most altcoins get-- so altcoiners don't get any ideas from this comment.  Just about a year ago or so the entire doge network was completely unable to bring up a single new node for *weeks*  until a bitcoin developer friend had a friend that wanted to dump their doge (the outage actually drove up prices because it limited the supply of old coins).  He had to fix some gross incompetence that was preventing nodes from syncing  (such as completely re-validating the defectively expensive scrypt POW and the gigant MM proofs every time it read one off the disk to give it to a peer) then used his fixed node to fix the other nodes, and brought their essentially failed (but hardly noticed failure since pools and exchanges were still running) network back to life.  Maybe next time no family member of a real developer will have doge to dump and it will just stay dead?  who knows!

Honestly I'd much rather see BTC merge mining with doge+LTC than with any of this inefficient BRC20 crap. Maybe BIP301 is on to something. But then again our protocol development has basically stagnated because discussing anything has become more like US congress where everyone argues with each other and agrees on nothing.

At least DOGE and LTC are widely agreed on to have actual value. While the popularity of Ordinals and BRC20 is basically not guarrenteed to stay as it is because get-rich-quicker's will tire of it and move to the Next Big Thing(TM).

Why do you take that for granted? Bitcoin fee income levels (even the sustained ones outside of the recent traffic) are many times the entire fees PLUS subsidy of several competing altcoins combined.  Are they currently screwed?

Guess you don't live in an area where comcast has a monopoly. In many places they have a "100Mbps" which rarely performs, but lets them claim that they provide broadband for the purpose of government reports.

What "use case" are you referring to?  A description of a use case should not mention Bitcoin-- it should mention a problem people have which Bitcoin might be a solution.

I'll give some examples:

"My bank (and ANY conventional bank I can find) is only open for international wire transfers from (say) 10am to 3pm M-F or other such limited hours and I want to be able to send money internationally *at any time*, 365 days a year, because I don't know when a good opportunity will happen or an emergency will come up" Bitcoin solves this.

"I tried using online payments but Paypal froze my account randomly with no explanation and wouldn't give me my money back for a year" Bitcoin solves this.

"I wanted to hold on to money but my government keeps printing it like its going out of style, debasing its value" Bitcoin solves this.

"To escape inflation I kept wealth at home as silver but it took up an enormous amount of space and was easily stolen by thieves because it was hard to secure in a way that was impossible for others to access". Bitcoin solves this.

"To escape inflation AND theft risk, I stored wealth in gold bars in a safe deposit box, but because I didn't visit for two years the bank auctioned off the content (or alternatively the FBI came and took it all because some OTHER customers were suspected of drug dealing)". Bitcoin fixes this.

"I wanted to buy a telescope but I couldn't convince my bank it wasn't fraud and they froze my account and it took me three days and a dozen phone calls to fix it" Bitcoin solves this.

"I wanted to buy provocative comic books, but even though they are unambiguously legal where I live, the government leaned on payment providers to deplatform the vendor" Bitcoin solves this.

"I'm concerned that years down the line my country might be taken over by a theocracy and they'll get all the payment company records and start executing people who purchased birth control or subject them to some less dire punishment." Bitcoin can help here too.

Each of these cases Bitcoin can help with because it removes trusted third parties from the process of either transacting or storing your wealth, trusted third parties which fail to deliver a stable system, can capriciously interfere with your right to associate with others, or otherwise act against your best interest.  They're the use cases Bitcoin set out to solve, which its fundamental properties are designed to satisfy and are mostly difficult to impossible for other systems to solve (except to the extent that they imitate Bitcoin's design).  Use cases which aren't exclusive-- that any old alternative will do too are find, but they don't provide a reason for someone to use Bitcoin when they otherwise wouldn't-- instead Bitcoin will get used for those based on other factors like existing usage for the exclusive reasons or because Bitcoin is less expensive (but that is a pretty unlikely case for cases where a centralized alternative works, because centralized alternatives can always be cheaper if they choose to be).

Are you going to get a sex change, too?    

We're in the 300-400's this morning, I could see a haze yesterday but it's more dense and visible today.  

Also woke up to the power being off... smh. We have a smaller generator, nothing that would power the AC, luckily crews had it restored in about 3 hours... but I was a little worried.

The big inscriptions are non-standard still today, too.  The maximum weight of a standard transaction wasn't changed by taproot. ... but parties can and do pay miners to bypass those rules, and clearly have here.  So I think taproot is also pretty irrelevant for the huge ones too.

I don't think anyone can seriously deny that miners will accept payment to attack the network,  so I think the general skepticism for standardness as anything but a tool to protect forward compatibility mechanisms is probably well founded.

Sounds a bit unnecessary. Just cut out the middleman and block off the spam transactions in the first place. Problem solved. I think otherwise it would just make people weigh their return profit over their transaction cost loss and spam the blockchain anyway. NFTers are going to scam people for thousands if not hundreds of thousands per NFT. Would a higher transaction fee make them think twice? I don't think it would. Worst case scenario it would only give miners the impression that spam transactions are more rewarding than regular ones. Then those spam transactions turn into priority transactions.

Just to do a demo you can probably find another crap SHA256 coin to mine at a pool.
Or
Follow this guide and do a solo testnet pool. Probably an even better demo since you are doing it all locally.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5415335.0

Note that this is not my work so I cannot verify how accurate the guide it, but it seemed at the time last September to be useful to people.

Another option is to spend a few dollars and get a used but more modern miner. I don't know where you are in the world but S9 units are cheap as are some others since they are so power hungry by modern standards.

-Dave

They do. But I am not sure how I can verify it. You can check it from here https://www.binance.com/en/proof-of-reserves
Instead of checking their own claimed proof of reserve, I collected their Bitcoin Wallet data. Check the data below

Address 1- https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/address/34xp4vRoCGJym3xR7yCVPFHoCNxv4Twseo 248,597.39   BTC
Address 2- https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/address/38Xnrq8MZiKmYmwobbYdZQ5nnCbX1qvQfE 117,351.06 BTC
Address 3- https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/address/38DN2uFMZPiHLHJigfv4kWC9JWJrNnhLcn 40,041.05 BTC
Address 4- https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/address/bc1qm34lsc65zpw79lxes69zkqmk6ee3ewf0j77s3h 38,802.05 BTC
Address 5- https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/address/3LQUu4v9z6KNch71j7kbj8GPeAGUo1FW6a 37,926.98 BTC
Address 6- https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/address/3M219KR5vEneNb47ewrPfWyb5jQ2DjxRP6 37,326.42 BTC
Address 7- https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/address/3FHNBLobJnbCTFTVakh5TXmEneyf5PT61B 31,275.35 BTC
Address 8- https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/address/3Qxak1CZhLyZ7GVckKphLURdLBCjMfz9bA 17,669.23 BTC
Address 9- https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/address/34HpHYiyQwg69gFmCq2BGHjF1DZnZnBeBP 16,306.63 BTC
Address 10- https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/address/36zSLdRv1jyewjaC12fqK5fptn7PqewunL 10,031.96 BTC
Address 11- https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/address/3EbJfpmFgufYtzW9UFvf1GAfm2ted1Rwnr 3,821.08 BTC

There are a few more addresses currently holding less than 3000 BTC each. These are the major Wallets currently holding 599,148 BTC.
All of them are on-chain. They also hold some Shitcoin like wrapped Bitcoin, Bitcoin on BSC chain etc etc.

Thanks.
I think I know how staking works. But English is my third language, so please forgive my technically incorrect expression.
But I hope that we can agree that 55% of new coins go to the stakers (in my words, "into the staking system") and to the community fund (10%).

And the staking is one part that makes Dashit a security (apart from an organisation behind it and other stuff)


With regard to malicious intent:
The active lowering of the total cap and thereby the increasing of the impact of that convenient "bug" the devs abused to mine 2M coins in 1 day is enough evidence for malicious intent, afaic.

Normally as a dev you would try to decrease the impact of a bug, not increase it.  So in my eyes clear malicious intent

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

I am in a bit of a valley my outside readings are now crazy:
PM2.5 1190
PM10.0 1711




bring meter inside next to filters

huge improvement in under 3 minutes

I mean this would be great if they realized it.

But first thing first how to get the energy from the volcano Im I missing something here or I am just dumb  Like how? I know Coal powered, solar powered or nuclear powered but this is new for me.

Although if this happens meaning the electricity is cheap right and this is categorized as clean energy right?

I run with Bariin's software and have the following settings for my antminer 17 series miners. In this case S17PRO, T17+ and S17+ miners.

Temp mode: auto

Target 75c
Hot 85c
Dangerous92c

Can't find any information from Bitmain about recommended chip temperatures for 17 serie only for PCB.

What do you guys have for temp settings and what is working for you?

Thanks in advance!