The difficulty you posted, will show a increase, because the combined network power increased.  Once the network power decrease, when the big companies leave, as in his hypothetical scenario, the difficulty will decrease. {Adapt to the change} Mining will be profitable for ASIC companies long after consumers. Due to economies of scale, they can build ASICs at a fraction of the price they sell them for, and thus expand their farms for very little costs. This idea that people (consumers) will keep mining even when incredibly unprofitable is crazy... What is the point when you can buy more Bitcoins with $100 than you can mine with $100 in electricity plus equipment costs? The ASIC manufacturers and huge mines are setting up in places with super cheap power and cheap operating expenses (cold places using nature to cool equipment), the average consumer cannot afford to do this. |
|
|
|
Why don't we have a proper forum on our own yet? Devs could you please open one asap?
It really shouldn't be that half of all threads in the section are about Monero, I believe this is causing great damage to the overall users' perception of the coin.
The number of threads is far less than a fair share based on market cap. There is no grounds for this complaint. It is a complaint which originated with trolls who proceeded to create many vapid threads with XMR or Monero in the title. I'm not satisfied with your answer at all. I'm an investor in Monero and it makes me very angry to see this place hammered with Monero topics. Monero is probably the only coin in the top 20 market cap that refuses to have its own forum. Like this how could one possibly complain that so many folks are annoyed of it? I can understand this sentiment. Please change your attitude I've told them before that not having their own forums is doing more harm than good, but like anonymity said... they think they know everything. I think the Monero trolling is a direct result of not having their own forums. |
|
|
|
|
Stop being douche nozzles and listen to Anonymint....
|
|
|
|
Even if only 2 people in the world, run a mining rig, will it still be seen as decentralized.
No... Just no. Why not, it's not a single "body" influencing the situation, if 2 or more people mine. The way that the protocol are written, encourage more people to mine.
How can you convince them if it is unprofitable, as it has been since ASICs hit these scene? .... What difficulty decrease? http://bitcoindifficulty.com/ |
|
|
|
Due to the mark ups charge by ASIC manufacturers, economies of scale allowing people with deep pockets and ASIC manufacturers setting up large farms at a cheaper price than consumers, exponential difficulty increasing, and scams (pre-orders never shipping or shipping late, in stock orders shipping late, cloud mining ponzis). http://bitcoindifficulty.com/ |
|
|
|
Even if only 2 people in the world, run a mining rig, will it still be seen as decentralized.
No... Just no. The way that the protocol are written, encourage more people to mine.
How can you convince them if it is unprofitable, as it has been since ASICs hit these scene? |
|
|
|
XMR people think they know everything.
You are just now noticing this? |
|
|
|
I prefer Doge over Litecoin. Both are pretty useless, but at least Doge has a fun community and cool mascot.  I've been hard on Doge in the past, but they have grown on me. |
|
|
|
|
BitsharesX is doing exactly what you describe with market pegged assets that resemble the value of FIAT and commodities in a decentralized manner.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with you OP but some people are in denial about the inevitability of Bitcoin's centralization. They will be their own undoing IMO, but time will tell. One thing I don't agree with you though is that this is the only flaw Bitcoin has. There are many flaws, being stubborn is one of them, as you will see momentarily as the Bitcoin zealots show up to put lipstick on their pig. It is sad that they are more worried about applying make up over the problems than fixing the issues. I was once a Bitcoin supporter, but I can't stand the stubbornness in the community anymore. I stick around here in hopes that they can come to a realization of reality.
|
|
|
|
OP: Why don't you ask the man that created the Internet... Al Gore?  |
|
|
|
Maybe he just wants to see coins burn before he strikes a death blow?
Which is stupid. Why not just get it over with instead watching the panic?
I think you're missing the point - over three years BCX has done hardly anything to demonstrate he is capable of striking a death blow. You must of seen posts by heavy duty cryptoheads before, they can't resist littering them with esoteric formulas and lots of maths. BCX doesnt go beyond prices and hashrates yet he spots exploits all the other experts missed? You're kidding, right? BCX has certainly killed coins before, a few of them. I have a theory that BCX is not working alone, possibly he is still working with Artforz. Artforz is the brains, and BCX has the means (hash power/money.) They have a mutually beneficial partnership and split the profits from exploiting coins. Perhaps they have heavily invested in a different Anon coin and have a lot to gain by killing Cryptonote coins, or they simply plan to profit from the exploit itself. If you check BCX's post history, he admits he can't code back in2011 in the first few pages of his posts. Someone must write these exploits for him, if he is not working with Artforz anymore then he is working with someone else. I don't think this theory is too far fetched. Is It True? Or its just because fits with your profile of monero-bashing posts. Truth is BCX knows he has a legion of trolls to hype up his narrative against Monero, if thats the case you end being just one more of his indirect henchman. Someone can't take a joke (empty wallet) What I posted was speculation and my honest assessment that BCX does not work alone after spending hours researching his past the other night. Take it or leave it, I don't care. You can't deny he has successfully attacked coins in the past, writing it off as a lie would be dumb on Monero's part. If you look through his history when he announced he would attack a coin, there were people saying he was bluffing just like you. Those people turned out to be wrong on several occasions. Btw... Is it true? Or is it just because it fits your profile of a Monero fan boy <link to every post you've ever made in recent history> |
|
|
|
Maybe he just wants to see coins burn before he strikes a death blow?
Which is stupid. Why not just get it over with instead watching the panic?
I think you're missing the point - over three years BCX has done hardly anything to demonstrate he is capable of striking a death blow. You must of seen posts by heavy duty cryptoheads before, they can't resist littering them with esoteric formulas and lots of maths. BCX doesnt go beyond prices and hashrates yet he spots exploits all the other experts missed? You're kidding, right? BCX has certainly killed coins before, a few of them. I have a theory that BCX is not working alone, possibly he is still working with Artforz. Artforz is the brains, and BCX has the means (hash power/money.) They have a mutually beneficial partnership and split the profits from exploiting coins. Perhaps they have heavily invested in a different Anon coin and have a lot to gain by killing Cryptonote coins, or they simply plan to profit from the exploit itself. If you check BCX's post history, he admits he can't code back in2011 in the first few pages of his posts. Someone must write these exploits for him, if he is not working with Artforz anymore then he is working with someone else. I don't think this theory is too far fetched. |
|
|
|
+1
Bitcoin is the best. (for now)
Bitcoin does not have the best tech.
Bitcoin has the biggest network so it is the easiest to use. That is why it is the best.
A coin spent and accepted is a real coin and a good coin.
Many other coins have much better tech, but not nearly the network and end user points.
Alt coins can't really be spent so they aren't worth much.
If/When one of these better techs gets a bigger network and more end points of sale, it will be very interesting to watch how it challenges bitcoin and probably usurps, but not completely displaces it.
Better tech = faster, lighter, stronger, safer, easier, prettier, better, simpler, more adaptable, more options, and better meeting the needs of the world
This guy gets it. Furthermore, PoS coins have network effects of their own which makes PoS clones have to go through the above steps and innovation to usurp them. You can't clone a cryptocurrency.. PoW or PoS... and expect it to be successful. |
|
|
|
It's actually very easy to start a new PoW coin. All you need to do is fork Bitcoin by mining a new Genesis Block. You can change the protocol more significantly, but it isn't necessary. The altcoins are unsuccessful because they haven't changed the protocol in a significant way and people haven't invested enough energy into creating them.
The exact same applies for PoS coins. How do you not get this........... |
|
|
|
The reason why there are not more PoW coins is because it takes work (money) to be able create (mine) PoW coins, therefore there is more risk if your coin does not catch on with the masses.
It also takes money to be able to create competitive PoS coins. To be competitive you need to be innovative and have the below bolded assets, and to implement those innovations/assets is not free. You either need to spend a lot of time developing and marketing (time=money) or you need raise funds (IPO) to develop a competitive PoS coin. Either way you are risking money on the success of the PoS cryptocurrency. A competitive cryptocurrency relies on it having the assets bolded below. With a PoS coin on the other hand it costs nothing to make (mine) the coins so there is nothing to stop someone from making 10 (or 100, or 1,000) PoS coins hoping that at least one will catch on.
I don't get this obsession with PoW in that it is the only way a cryptocurrency can derive its value or success. Again, you are completely ignoring other dynamics to a cryptocurrency's success including network effects, features, utility, infrastructures, ease of use, communities, innovation, developer dedication & skills, and resources (large market caps to pay for development/infrastructure).
10, 100, or 1000 copies of the same PoS cryptocurrency will not be successful due the dynamics I listed above. Just as 10, 100, or 1000 copies of a PoW cryptocurrency will not be successful. If you think it is so easy to create a successful PoS cryptocurrency, then I urge you to go try it. I think you will find it much harder to be successful than you are alluding to. There are many PoS coins that have failed, just as there are many PoW coins that have failed. This is because the consensus algorithm is only one factor to the success of a cryptocurrency. With PoW actual money needs to be risked in order to make the coin. This also speaks to the security of the coin because an attacker will need to invest actual money to attack a PoW coin while they will need to invest nothing (if it cost nothing to mine) to attack a PoS coin
I've already addressed that it costs money to make a competitive PoS coin above. As to security, there are different forms of PoS and I believe there is at least one of them that is sufficiently safe from a "nothing at stake" attack, which is what I believe you are referring to. It is called delegated proof of stake. More about DPoS: http://bitshares.org/delegated-proof-of-stake/Even more about DPoS: http://wiki.bitshares.org/index.php/DPOSOld discussions on DPoS: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4009.0Discussions regarding "nothing at stake" attacks: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6584.0More discussion about NaS attack: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6638.0 |
|
|
|
Will pay1% a year staking. And yes i own a boatload.  Lol I figured you own at least a little bit. I always thought Solarcoin was an interesting idea, sadly I don't think it's likely to have much success in this competitive market. I guess that is just my opinion though.. good luck! |
|
|
|
So you're just going to ignore kodtycoon's very valid arguments? PoW does not give a coin value, otherwise there wouldn't be many worthless PoW coins. Just as PoS does not give a coin value, otherwise there wouldn't be many worthless PoS coins.
You are completely ignoring network effects, features, utility, infrastructures, ease of use, communities, innovation, developer dedication & skills, and resources (large market caps to pay for development/infrastructure).
There are many clones of Nxt and most of them are pretty much worthless. Only the ones with large communities and the most innovative ones have even a fraction of Nxt's market cap.
Yeah, that's why I think that the only PoS coin that will work is one that is marketed by a nation state and declared legal tender. You are either bias, clueless, or in denial. I'm not sure which one, but I am done debating with you sense you lack logical reasoning skills. At least I am able to admit PoS has flaws, but to you PoW's shit doesn't stink and you are clueless as to how cryptocurrencies derive their value on the free market. You need to be more open minded to perceive reality accurately. Welcome to my ignore list and please see yourself out of this PoW Bitcoin forum. Maybe that was harsh, but I'm not one to beat around the bush. Ignore me if you must.. I was done talking to you anyways. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
