Bitcoin IS basically DESTROYED

[TheDreadPirateDickstein]

So if I flip burgers and buy BTC, I'm indirectly mining BTC? (Minimum wage paycheck) => (BTC), voila?
Some twisted thinking, but K.

The vast majority of altcoins don't even have altcoin X / USD pairs. You are forced through BTC first to cash them out. It's not that big of a step, or so twisted.

By your logic, everyone buying BTC is "indirectly mining" BTC. By the same logic, miners selling their mined BTC are "indirectly mining" USD. Because they wouldn't mine BTC if they couldn't sell it for USD.
So ya, twisted.

TL;DR: There is no such thing as free electricity. Unless by "free," you mean "steal without getting caught."

Well someone is mining with those GPUs and it ain't the Chinese...

Well ya, people like you, who think that stolen = free. Mind you, I have nothing against theft, just don't want you to misunderstand what it is that you are doing. Electricity is free to you, but your mom, your landlord, or the people around you have to pay for it.
So mining on "free" electricity is no different than starting a toilet paper business, because you can get free toilet paper from your school's toilets.
P.S. Don't.

I can explain to you  cases that 80 and 90 % discounts are perfectly legal.  My friend rented on floor of an office building then sublet it to a printing business he kept 2 small rooms about 10 to 15 %  of the floor.  The sublet has the printing guy paying 80% of the 13 cent a kwatt power bill.

My friend has had the lease for 15 to 16 years.  He usually got a 1000 a month power bill that was paid 800 printer 200 him.

He got screwed on the deal for 11 years as the real power split should have been 910 to 90  the printer used more gear and more ac in the summer.  Since my friend  was getting the rent at 80% which was correct he never bother to say the power should be 90-10.

bitcoin came along now the bill was 1150 that is now paid 920 -  230.

So he is not stealing but paying 30 bucks for 150 worth of power.

So we first mined s-1's then mined s-3's now mine s-7's    perfectly legal and not stealing.

Your friend sets up a lease to sublet 90% of the space, making the sublessor responsible for 80 (rather than the due 90) percent of the power bill? So he keeps getting screwed (because he was his own realtor and his own lawyer?)  for 11 years, until he figures out how to screw the printer back? And the printer doesn't revisit the terms of the lease because, presumably, he's as clueless as your friend? K.

How about this equally common and plausible scenario: My friend robs the printer blind, but turns out it's totally cool -- the printer won't call the cops, because robbed a bank before becoming a printer.
Weird people ...doing weird shit to each other.
TL;DR: look for better friends.

To me all this is is dirke dirke Mumining Jihad. I am the one who got the Greek Whale to creep this thing up, and I am the one who got him to make the NYC BTC center. Now enough about this irrelevant mining nonsense and let's just admit the glory days of BITCOIN ARE OVER!

[yenxz]

Bitcoin is basically destroyed now with 70% of the mining controlled by China, soon to be 98+%, and with Blockstream implementing their SegWit soft fork Trojan Horse so as Matonis admits can end up increasing the 21 million coins limit.

The entire ecosystem is headed for a clusterfuck.

I honestly believe this is the truth.  What is there to add ?

~CfA~

if bitcoin controlled by china,why dont we move to china?or at least we can consolidate with china,and ask them have a good control. bitcoin on china was very ood,but i dont think they try to control bitcoin,because i'm sure china know that bitcoin is cannot controlled.

[European Central Bank]

China definitely owns mining. But if you check the node count it's only 13th in the world. No one there has any real use for it. The trade volumes are garbage. 

Let's say the Chinese government does decide to shut it down. There's over 2000 nodes in the US and less than 100 in China. The rest of the world would catch up pretty rapidly.

[Blacula X]

China definitely owns mining. But if you check the node count it's only 13th in the world. No one there has any real use for it. The trade volumes are garbage.  

Let's say the Chinese government does decide to shut it down. There's over 2000 nodes in the US and less than 100 in China. The rest of the world would catch up pretty rapidly.

Node count is irrelevant, that's why few nodes in China; one is enough. The cost of throwing up a node is trivial compared to the costs of mining. This has been talked to death.

[spooderman]

"Blockstream implementing their SegWit soft fork Trojan Horse"

Lmao this guy is losing it. The blockstream FUDsters know no limits on their nonsense. The trojan horse was the Bitcoin XT, then Bitcoin Classic hard fork attempts, not segregated witness, segwit is actual advance in scaling Bitcoin. Whatever, it's a waste of time dealing with this shit.

segwit is how we make the code more sophisticated. rather than saying "not enough planes for people. let's make plane cabins twice as large and change nothing else about the design".

[Minecache]

"Blockstream implementing their SegWit soft fork Trojan Horse"

Lmao this guy is losing it. The blockstream FUDsters know no limits on their nonsense. The trojan horse was the Bitcoin XT, then Bitcoin Classic hard fork attempts, not segregated witness, segwit is actual advance in scaling Bitcoin. Whatever, it's a waste of time dealing with this shit.

segwit is how we make the code more sophisticated. rather than saying "not enough planes for people. let's make plane cabins twice as large and change nothing else about the design".

Incorrect. Segwit is more like saying we only need 1 pilot fly an aircraft so let's scrap the copilot and cabin crew to fit x more passengers into the same sized aircraft. After all what's the worst that can happen?

[bitbaby]

Even though a country holds a large portion of the mining power, it doesn't mean it is destroyed, it just means there are a lot of people who are interested in it there, and have the money to invest in new hardware.

Uh uh, they're only interested in making money but then again, who isn't, but don't make the mistake of thinking they care about bitcoin, they're only in it to make the money and they're making a ton of it and when that changes, they'll drop it and move on.

Also, it seems a bit melodramatic to say "they're going to have 98+%", even though they have a significant portion right now. A country having mining power doesn't mean they control it lol. As I said, it just means there are people there with money, and not all of them are interested in following orders.

It affects the security of the network.

[sockpuppet1]

Don't we all hope Xi Jinping, Putin, Merkel, Hellary, Craig Wright, Theymos, copy-leftist Gregory Maxwell, and globalist-ideologue Julian Assange control our future:

The kids in the west have already been groomed to accept these invasive policies by the new religion of environmentalism.

Coming soon to a socialist paradise near you.

Family Planning Police Screen Women Four Times a Year for Pregnancy
http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/05/07/chinas-family-planning-police-screen-women-four-times-year-pregnancy/

According to a recent report from the BBC, all Chinese women of childbearing age have mandatory check-ups four times a year to ensure they are healthy and not pregnant without permission. A couple needs official approval before starting a family and must ask permission before trying to conceive. Population officers keep strict tabs on each woman’s medical history, listing the children she has, the contraception she uses, and any terminated pregnancies.

The Communist Party employs an estimated one million people in its army of family planning officials, who patrol the land, enforcing China’s strict population-control policies.

When you make redistribution a natural right and pay for such redistribution with an unsustainable economic system you eventually reach the point where promised handouts cannot be paid. At that point the path if least resistance is population controls and reproductive restrictions. It is likely a matter of when not if such measures are introduced in the west.

Hmm!  And I have read other pieces that China was slacking off its hard-line policy of one child.  Their one child policy has led to a weird demographic problem there: estimates of 30,000,000 - 100,000,000 more males (than women) in the cohort of child-bearing years there in China.

Good find.   
 
Socialism leads to so many other distortions too, and the end point is totalitarianism.

[sockpuppet1]

I am speaking on behalf of TPTB_need_war aka AnonyMint, who is quoted in the OP, because he is currently banned for 9 more days due to calling theymos and gmaxwell out on their censorship of a potential technical back door in Bitcoin. There is a simpler explanation of Satoshi's obviously intentional technical error. It is obviously intentional because it was quite well known by 2009 that the HMAC formulation is more secure yet Satoshi used the more suspect double hashing everywhere in BitCON.

My prior post upthread has many much rebuttals and explanations.

Bitcoin destroyed because of china ? If it wasn't china buyers = bitcoin will worth nothing !

If your assertion is correct, then that might be indicative of the true worth of the debt-driven BitCON bubble (debt for building State electricity sold at low cost to cronies, debt for 0% loans to cronies, etc):

2018 Kaboom!

https://www.docdroid.net/file/download/i3f8uVF/stanley-druckenmiller-the-end-game.pdf (see page 7)

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21698240-it-question-when-not-if-real-trouble-will-hit-china-coming-debt-bust

Bitcoin might be destroyed (I think it's not) but there are successors anyways

Bitcoin started all this and all this won't die. It's about the idea.

Head over the Altcoin Discussion forum and read some of TPTB_need_war's analysis of the sordid state of altcoins. Please don't tell me you've fallen for the proof-of-stake delusion. Learn the technology from someone who is honest. You may also want to follow smooth's posts, as he is very honest and astute. Note Minecache and others will disagree. So go over there and read for yourself so you can form your own opinion.

I believe so far just about every crypto-currency is a scam, including Bitcoin. I have some respect for Monero, because it has an ASIC-resistant proof-of-work hash, strong privacy (not anonymity from the NSA!), and a fair distribution (no premine/instamine/ICO). But I don't think Monero is the solution either. I don't believe it can scale and remain decentralized, because profitable proof-of-work will always aggregate to economies-of-scale over time. TPTB_need_war will publish a white paper eventually, that will explain all of this. In any case, for the moment Monero is probably reasonably decentralized, but the volatility is huge and don't buy it expecting to reap gains. If you are into crypto-currency for profit, then ignore my posts. I am writing about our future as a society. Disclaimer: I don't own any crypto-currency at this time. I recently sold my BTC. TPTB_need_war is working on several projects, such as a new programming language, a new social network, and maybe a new crypto-currency but that is a long-time from now. So he speaks from some bias, but honestly.

From the beginning, this has always been a possibility: A banker who can effectively create unlimited fiat money can easily acquire all the mining infrastructure and control the network hash power (Of course he don't need to do so through one single entity, it will look like that many people control the mining infrastructure, but when a vote happens people will discover that over 90% of hash power is controlled by a few entity and can go against majority of people's will)

PoW method is vulnerable to large capital taking over. This is the nature of PoW, so some people have suggested to use a PoW+PoS hybrid model for the future mining, but without major hash power, how do you implement this change into the network? Why miners should give up their dominance power today? It seems only a fork or re-design of a new coin can start afresh

There are several technical factors you need to take into account. For example, the greater the hashrate (of the pool if not solo mining), the more often the miner is mining on the block that won't be orphaned. The propagation delay of block announcements (or any group with 33+% of the hashrate colluding to delay block announcements, which was explained the research paper Majority is not Enough: Bitcoin Mining is Vulnerable), means that those with more hashrate are more profitable given the same unitized hardware and electricity costs. Ditto that every miner (or pool) has the same cost of validation regardless of their hashrate. This means that even if everything is fair and equal, naturally over time the mining will centralize to an oligarchy. This is a property of profitable proof-of-work and there is nothing that can be done to fix it. TPTB_need_war made an entire thread about this to discuss it in detail. The flaws of proof-of-stake are also discussed in that thread and I urge Minecache and others not to turn this thread into a PoS vs. PoW discussion. Bring the PoS vs. PoW debate over to that other thread, other such thread if you want to debate that.

What TPTB_need_war concluded is that the only design that can remain economically decentralized is UNprofitable proof-of-work. This means that every spender would send some PoW share with each transaction. The details are complex and it can't work the same as Satoshi's design. Most of the details are already explained in various posts that TPTB_need_war has made spread out over many different threads. But he is not implementing this design right now, because he is busy on the other programming priorities I mentioned.

Any way, there is no solution to that will remain immune to the fact that humans are manipulated like a herd when it comes to politics. And they are lazy. And they are easily duped by the elite. So even if TPTB_need_war implements his solution, it is likely that the people will still end up sending their PoW shares to an oligarchy of "pools" even though unprofitable PoW means no one gains by using a pool. People are just dumb. But we might have a fighting chance with this redesign of Satoshi's flawed design. Many people have criticized this UNprofitable PoW thinking it won't work because there is not the proper incentives and Nash equilibirum. TPTB_need_war says they are wrong and he will eventually publish a whitepaper to better explain all the details.

I don't know where we will end up with all this. But my guess is the elite will win and the people will lose. But some people are working on hard. Please don't disrespect TPTB_need_war. His is working as furiously as he can, and no one helps him. Maybe one day he will get some assistance and be recognized for his efforts. But he doesn't care! He is doing what he is doing as a labor of love and because he loves the challenge.

China destroy btc? Omg lmao, if btc dead, then theres must be a new cryptocurrency :v

Please re-read the rebuttals I provided upthread, for I already explained that your logic is a strawman and a non-sequitur. It is a strawman because it is doubtful that China's oligarchy miners will destroy Bitcoin, rather they will maximize profit and control, turning Bitcoin into yet another defacto totalitarian fiat. You all will continue to support this totalitarian Bitcoin, because you ignore what you don't want to know because of your lust for profit and your ideological euphoria (and lots of ignorance as well).

It is also a non-sequitur, because if Bitcoin did die due to strangulation by centralized control, it would cause all the europhia to be gone and just like after the dot.com bubble died, it was several years before the bubble regained significant inertia. And we are heading into a global economic collapse in 2018, so there won't be any money floating around for speculation. The current massive debt bubble will be collapsing. BitCON is just to steal your money so you have nothing when the debt bubble collapses. And/or it will be a totalitarian digital currency during the coming capital controls and hard times. It is possible the-powers-that-be allow Bitcoin to be free for a longer period, in order to trap more people in it, before they use their centralized control over it to clamp down. It is going to be interesting to observe what happens.

Note I am not referring to a price decline per se, my point is about the other ways a fiat can be used against the people, such as forcing all our transactions to be tracked with digital identification when we sign our transactions. Forcing us to pay a tax to the world government on each transaction we sign, etc.

1. GPU mining for bitcoins is alive and well. But it has to be done indirectly, through altcoins. GPU =>altcoin=>bitcoin, voila!

So if I flip burgers and buy BTC, I'm indirectly mining BTC? (Minimum wage paycheck) => (BTC), voila?
Some twisted thinking, but K.

The vast majority of altcoins don't even have altcoin X / USD pairs. You are forced through BTC first to cash them out. It's not that big of a step, or so twisted.

By your logic, everyone buying BTC is "indirectly mining" BTC. By the same logic, miners selling their mined BTC are "indirectly mining" USD. Because they wouldn't mine BTC if they couldn't sell it for USD.
So ya, twisted.

Mining altcoins to exchange value for BTC, does not decentralize the protocol of the Bitcoin block chain. Only the Bitcoin miners control the policies of the protocol.

If 51% of them decide to change the protocol and the Bitcoiners are unable to mount a successful political campaign to organize a fork, then the oligarchy wins. And if they do fork, they would need to change the hash algorithm, otherwise the oligarchy could simply take over the fork as well. The delusion about forking is the the Bitcoiners can't agree on anything, so they certainly couldn't agree on a new proof-of-work hash algorithm. Besides, no one cares. Everybody only cares about profit and using what is already popular. No one here has a clue about how to organize to make something widely adopted and popular. The elite are in control. Now get down on your knees and pray to the elite, because they own you.

Should we be worried? Should we trade our BTC now for other coin like ETH?

No. Please go back to sleep.

[Deadman10]

China destroy btc? Omg lmao, if btc dead, then theres must be a new cryptocurrency :v

[Holliday]

Oh thank god. I don't have to come to this forum anymore.

[sockpuppet1]

Oh thank god. I don't have to come to this forum anymore.

Hahaha. Jim Ignatowski is my brother. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/70/Taxi_NBC_cast_final_season.jpg

[youyou_]

Oh thank god. I don't have to come to this forum anymore.

is this forum the house of trolls or what?

[Adrayrd]

Its not destroyed but the coin has no publicity any more thats why people think hes dead or
they call it destroyed. But there will be one day the coin disappears and never comes back.

[biggbox]

The mainland Chinese are able to product cheap parts for miners with cheap labour and they have almost free electricity in some parts of China.

With the right connections and the right amount of money, nothing seems impossible in mainland China.

[Amph]

So if I flip burgers and buy BTC, I'm indirectly mining BTC? (Minimum wage paycheck) => (BTC), voila?
Some twisted thinking, but K.

no because that isn't mining, you don't mine burger at macdonal

Mining BTC with GPUs is only feasible if by "subsidized power" you mean stolen, as in stolen from Mom or your national grid.

wrong, it's very profitable tnx to etheruem, at least for now, hell it's profitable for those with expensive electricity yet

[italian9]

Bitcoins can never be destroyed

[MingLee]

The mainland Chinese are able to product cheap parts for miners with cheap labour and they have almost free electricity in some parts of China.

With the right connections and the right amount of money, nothing seems impossible in mainland China.

Very, very little is impossible in China business-wise. There is a lot of cheap work available, a lot of buyers outside of China, and cheap parts abound within the Chinese economy.

Mining in China is able to take off because of these factors. It is insane just how much they can do there, and even though the conditions and the government might not be top-notch (It isn't in the west either) they can still aim to make a lot of money over a decent amount of time.

As I've been saying, though, there is no issues with a geographical location holding a lot of hashing power. It isn't a resource that is moved like a physical mining apparatus or gold is. China's hashing power means nothing unless they collaborate with each other, and even then it can be done by anyone with a number equally as large.

[r1cochet]

if 70% of the mining was from the USA most of you wouldn't be prattling on about it being centralised.

Pretty much this.....

From Above, you keep on trollin mate

[Donu]

Should we be worried? Should we trade our BTC now for other coin like ETH?