Bitcoin IS basically DESTROYED

[Ultrafinery]

Again. mining alts is not bitcoin mining. No more than coal mining is bitcoin mining.
If I mine coal or BBQ coins outside of China, this doesn't help Bitcoin decentralization one bit. I don't confirm Bitcoin transactions when I mine coal or altcoins. I do not solve Bitcoin blocks.
There really should be a "Spam Your Shit Signature Ads Here, Asshole!" section on this forum.

i don't care about mining 100% decentralization, because it was an utopia since the beginning, and the current scenario was intended by satoshi, so it's fine

I don't know how to explain this to you any simpler: Altcoin mining could be profitable, but so could coal mining. Neither altcoin mining nor coal mining have anything to do with Bitcoin mining, which is what this thread's about.

if you had the patience to read below, i explained why they are more akin, because they are basically the same thing, working only on a different chain, so no coal mine has nothing to do with bitcoin, you don't do it with the same hw

you can still mine bitcoin with cpu and gpu, the same you do with alt, it's just not profitable, which is a different thing

FFS Do you understand that this thread is about Bitcoin centralization, not altcoin centralization or coal mining centralization? How does altcoin mining affect Bitcoin centralization any more than coal mining does?

Re. "can still mine bitcoin with cpu and gpu": No one does that, so moot.

i think you missed the part were i said it was intended, by satoshi so it's no longer a problem

also with altcoin mining more people can actually mine bitcoin(indirectly), this mean that the bitcoin distrubution(from mining) is still decentralized, which is what matter in the end

There is no such thing as "mining bitcoin inderectly," that's just meaningless lingo.
You mine Bitcoin or you don't.

And no, Satoshi didn't "intend" for Bitcoin to be controlled by a handful of people who get together and decide which way shit's gonna fly on a handshake. That's more made-up bullshit.

it's still bitcoin distribution, done via mining on different chain, different fork

If you still can't understand why mining altcoins is irrelevant to Bitcoin centralization, I got nothing. GG if trolling & not really stupid. Either way, enjoy being the first (and hopefully only) one on my ignore list

there is no centralization untill we come to a 51% by a single pool, if you can not udnerstand this, then there is no point continuing this discussion

good luck thinking that minign is centralized, because it is not

Nah, when one pool controls 51%, that would not be centralization. That would be a sign that the guy running the pool is an idiot. Anyone with half a brain would just start another pool, which he'll also control.
There's exactly zero evidence that this is not currently happening, or can't be exploited when the time is right.

[Amph]

Again. mining alts is not bitcoin mining. No more than coal mining is bitcoin mining.
If I mine coal or BBQ coins outside of China, this doesn't help Bitcoin decentralization one bit. I don't confirm Bitcoin transactions when I mine coal or altcoins. I do not solve Bitcoin blocks.
There really should be a "Spam Your Shit Signature Ads Here, Asshole!" section on this forum.

i don't care about mining 100% decentralization, because it was an utopia since the beginning, and the current scenario was intended by satoshi, so it's fine

I don't know how to explain this to you any simpler: Altcoin mining could be profitable, but so could coal mining. Neither altcoin mining nor coal mining have anything to do with Bitcoin mining, which is what this thread's about.

if you had the patience to read below, i explained why they are more akin, because they are basically the same thing, working only on a different chain, so no coal mine has nothing to do with bitcoin, you don't do it with the same hw

you can still mine bitcoin with cpu and gpu, the same you do with alt, it's just not profitable, which is a different thing

FFS Do you understand that this thread is about Bitcoin centralization, not altcoin centralization or coal mining centralization? How does altcoin mining affect Bitcoin centralization any more than coal mining does?

Re. "can still mine bitcoin with cpu and gpu": No one does that, so moot.

i think you missed the part were i said it was intended, by satoshi so it's no longer a problem

also with altcoin mining more people can actually mine bitcoin(indirectly), this mean that the bitcoin distrubution(from mining) is still decentralized, which is what matter in the end

There is no such thing as "mining bitcoin inderectly," that's just meaningless lingo.
You mine Bitcoin or you don't.

And no, Satoshi didn't "intend" for Bitcoin to be controlled by a handful of people who get together and decide which way shit's gonna fly on a handshake. That's more made-up bullshit.

it's still bitcoin distribution, done via mining on different chain, different fork

If you still can't understand why mining altcoins is irrelevant to Bitcoin centralization, I got nothing. GG if trolling & not really stupid. Either way, enjoy being the first (and hopefully only) one on my ignore list

there is no centralization untill we come to a 51% by a single pool, if you can not udnerstand this, then there is no point continuing this discussion

good luck thinking that minign is centralized, because it is not

Nah, when one pool controls 51%, that would not be centralization. That would be a sign that the guy running the pool is an idiot. Anyone with half a brain would just start another pool, which he'll also control.
There's exactly zero evidence that this is not currently happening, or can't be exploited when the time is right.

you should bring evidence that this is happening not the opposite, the burden of proof is on who make the assumption

also he can not start another pool out of thin air, you know that a pool require a good infrastructure behind it that is not free, he can't just hope that magically, the miners will come and mine to pay the fee, for the cost of the server etc...

[calkob]

Its Dead Again..... lol  the sky is falling

[funkenstein]

Incorrect. You are ignoring part of the logic as to why the fascist command economy in China is facilitating the bitCON:

The only relevance of China, is that China has the right Communist corruption to facilitate building these ASIC mining farms with much lower cost, because the electricity is likely subsidized at near 0 cost to the miner by the State. For example, the $billions spent by the taxpayers to construct the environmental disaster Three Gorges Dam (actually in China the tax is the low interest rate paid on savings accounts offered by State controlled banking which the LGUs then borrow at near 0%). The ostensible fact that China is a totalitarian/fascist command economy is relevant in the sense that it means the owners of the mining farms are necessarily beholden to the Communist Party leaders and their commands.

[...]

  Replace "China" with "USA" and Three Gorges with Hoover.  Notice nothing changes, except of course your claims of "fascism" and central control ring much more true in the police state.  Fiat and fascism leave misery and environmental destruction in their wake but that is neither here nor there for this discussion. 

They blocked Bitcoin Classic and XT and appear to be deciding for the us that SegWit is the protocol hard fork that will be forced on all of us. And there is not a damn thing any of us can or will do about it. Note the Great Firewall (GFW) of China is not a valid argument to be against larger blocks, because the pool server could be located outside and only the hash of the block needs to be sent across the GFW.

"They" didn't decide anything apart from what software "they" would run, for any value of "they".

Running another wallet won't help you. Your inaction and lack of understanding means they can put the Trojan Horse in and then there is nothing more we can do about it. We are screwed. You are very much a sheep and I hope you remain a sheep for the rest of your life. I won't be able to stop the fact that the masses like you are dumber than horse shit. That is why the-powers-that-be don't care if I warn you all here. They know you readers are sheep and will always be sheep. They laugh. I am starting to laugh at you all too. I tried my best to explain to you all, and instead I get these inane replies. Sorry if my reply is ad hominem. I really prefer to not think you are dumber than horse shit. I really do. You don't afford me that opportunity. I am frustrated. I give up. I will not talk to you fools any more. Have it your way.

LOLK.  They can put a trojan horse in what exactly now?  If nobody runs their software, who cares what's in it?   

 


BitCON is also a privately issued corporate scrip issued to a few owners of mining farms. The electricity is charged to the taxpayer, not to the-powers-that-be which defacto "own" these mining farms.

Dude I have a list of every coin ever mined.  You have access to that list as well.  That's what public coin means.  What the everliving fuck?  Privately issued???!??  The public coin known as BTC runs on excess electricity as it always has.   

[Ultrafinery]

Again. mining alts is not bitcoin mining. No more than coal mining is bitcoin mining.
If I mine coal or BBQ coins outside of China, this doesn't help Bitcoin decentralization one bit. I don't confirm Bitcoin transactions when I mine coal or altcoins. I do not solve Bitcoin blocks.
There really should be a "Spam Your Shit Signature Ads Here, Asshole!" section on this forum.

i don't care about mining 100% decentralization, because it was an utopia since the beginning, and the current scenario was intended by satoshi, so it's fine

I don't know how to explain this to you any simpler: Altcoin mining could be profitable, but so could coal mining. Neither altcoin mining nor coal mining have anything to do with Bitcoin mining, which is what this thread's about.

if you had the patience to read below, i explained why they are more akin, because they are basically the same thing, working only on a different chain, so no coal mine has nothing to do with bitcoin, you don't do it with the same hw

you can still mine bitcoin with cpu and gpu, the same you do with alt, it's just not profitable, which is a different thing

FFS Do you understand that this thread is about Bitcoin centralization, not altcoin centralization or coal mining centralization? How does altcoin mining affect Bitcoin centralization any more than coal mining does?

Re. "can still mine bitcoin with cpu and gpu": No one does that, so moot.

i think you missed the part were i said it was intended, by satoshi so it's no longer a problem

also with altcoin mining more people can actually mine bitcoin(indirectly), this mean that the bitcoin distrubution(from mining) is still decentralized, which is what matter in the end

There is no such thing as "mining bitcoin inderectly," that's just meaningless lingo.
You mine Bitcoin or you don't.

And no, Satoshi didn't "intend" for Bitcoin to be controlled by a handful of people who get together and decide which way shit's gonna fly on a handshake. That's more made-up bullshit.

it's still bitcoin distribution, done via mining on different chain, different fork

If you still can't understand why mining altcoins is irrelevant to Bitcoin centralization, I got nothing. GG if trolling & not really stupid. Either way, enjoy being the first (and hopefully only) one on my ignore list

there is no centralization untill we come to a 51% by a single pool, if you can not udnerstand this, then there is no point continuing this discussion

good luck thinking that minign is centralized, because it is not

Nah, when one pool controls 51%, that would not be centralization. That would be a sign that the guy running the pool is an idiot. Anyone with half a brain would just start another pool, which he'll also control.
There's exactly zero evidence that this is not currently happening, or can't be exploited when the time is right.

you should bring evidence that this is happening not the opposite, the burden of proof is on who make the assumption

also he can not start another pool out of thin air, you know that a pool require a good infrastructure behind it that is not free, he can't just hope that magically, the miners will come and mine to pay the fee, for the cost of the server etc...

I tell you that "There's exactly zero evidence that this is not currently happening," and you think "the burden of proof is on who make the assumption"? What, exactly, do you want me to prove here? That I have no evidence?

Finally, a pool requires no more "infrastructure" than an ordinary server with an interweb connection. And it's not a bunch of home miners with USB sticks we're talking about here, but a few factory farms. Which the pool operator also owns/is invested in. Do you know *anything* about mining?

[Betwrong]

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

Hundred times NO. Why the fact that most Bitcoins are mined now in China should be a problem? Most diamonds are mined in Central and Southern Africa and how exactly this affects the valuableness of diamonds?

If you want to use diamonds as an example then de beers basically controlled the diamond market for a long time.

They maintain an artificially high price through the restriction of supply although they recently lost control and the monopoly.

Exactly. Same thing might happen to anyone who will try to controll Bitcoin. Also when de beers was controlling almost everything in the filed of diamonds people wouldn't throw away their diamonds and they wouldn't stop buying them, right? What I'm saying is that IMO it shouldn't a big problem to Bitcoin if a corporation controlls large part of them.

[senyorito123]

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

Hundred times NO. Why the fact that most Bitcoins are mined now in China should be a problem? Most diamonds are mined in Central and Southern Africa and how exactly this affects the valuableness of diamonds?

If you want to use diamonds as an example then de beers basically controlled the diamond market for a long time.

They maintain an artificially high price through the restriction of supply although they recently lost control and the monopoly.

Exactly. Same thing might happen to anyone who will try to controll Bitcoin. Also when de beers was controlling almost everything in the filed of diamonds people wouldn't throw away their diamonds and they wouldn't stop buying them, right? What I'm saying is that IMO it shouldn't a big problem to Bitcoin if a corporation controlls large part of them.

Yeah its not a big problem the problem there is no one holding big bitcoin so we can call it destroy and i think it is good news for chinq holding or controlling big amount of bitcoin it meabs they adopt to much count of btc and it can be strong fundation so that bitcoin will not totally destroyed or going down,

[boyptc]

Its Dead Again..... lol  the sky is falling

Yeah it made me a bit disappointed of this fall, but still hoping that it will skyrocket again.
Let's just wait patiently I hope bitcoin will not disappoint us.

[Amph]

Again. mining alts is not bitcoin mining. No more than coal mining is bitcoin mining.
If I mine coal or BBQ coins outside of China, this doesn't help Bitcoin decentralization one bit. I don't confirm Bitcoin transactions when I mine coal or altcoins. I do not solve Bitcoin blocks.
There really should be a "Spam Your Shit Signature Ads Here, Asshole!" section on this forum.

i don't care about mining 100% decentralization, because it was an utopia since the beginning, and the current scenario was intended by satoshi, so it's fine

I don't know how to explain this to you any simpler: Altcoin mining could be profitable, but so could coal mining. Neither altcoin mining nor coal mining have anything to do with Bitcoin mining, which is what this thread's about.

if you had the patience to read below, i explained why they are more akin, because they are basically the same thing, working only on a different chain, so no coal mine has nothing to do with bitcoin, you don't do it with the same hw

you can still mine bitcoin with cpu and gpu, the same you do with alt, it's just not profitable, which is a different thing

FFS Do you understand that this thread is about Bitcoin centralization, not altcoin centralization or coal mining centralization? How does altcoin mining affect Bitcoin centralization any more than coal mining does?

Re. "can still mine bitcoin with cpu and gpu": No one does that, so moot.

i think you missed the part were i said it was intended, by satoshi so it's no longer a problem

also with altcoin mining more people can actually mine bitcoin(indirectly), this mean that the bitcoin distrubution(from mining) is still decentralized, which is what matter in the end

There is no such thing as "mining bitcoin inderectly," that's just meaningless lingo.
You mine Bitcoin or you don't.

And no, Satoshi didn't "intend" for Bitcoin to be controlled by a handful of people who get together and decide which way shit's gonna fly on a handshake. That's more made-up bullshit.

it's still bitcoin distribution, done via mining on different chain, different fork

If you still can't understand why mining altcoins is irrelevant to Bitcoin centralization, I got nothing. GG if trolling & not really stupid. Either way, enjoy being the first (and hopefully only) one on my ignore list

there is no centralization untill we come to a 51% by a single pool, if you can not udnerstand this, then there is no point continuing this discussion

good luck thinking that minign is centralized, because it is not

Nah, when one pool controls 51%, that would not be centralization. That would be a sign that the guy running the pool is an idiot. Anyone with half a brain would just start another pool, which he'll also control.
There's exactly zero evidence that this is not currently happening, or can't be exploited when the time is right.

you should bring evidence that this is happening not the opposite, the burden of proof is on who make the assumption

also he can not start another pool out of thin air, you know that a pool require a good infrastructure behind it that is not free, he can't just hope that magically, the miners will come and mine to pay the fee, for the cost of the server etc...

I tell you that "There's exactly zero evidence that this is not currently happening," and you think "the burden of proof is on who make the assumption"? What, exactly, do you want me to prove here? That I have no evidence?

Finally, a pool requires no more "infrastructure" than an ordinary server with an interweb connection. And it's not a bunch of home miners with USB sticks we're talking about here, but a few factory farms. Which the pool operator also owns/is invested in. Do you know *anything* about mining?

there is also zero evidence that is happening, which you should provide, before claiming such possibility...

he need server and a very good connection, do you think he can have that server for free? also do you think that miners will spread their miners to his pool magically? please stop the bullshit

also there is no evidence that pool operator are owning enough miners to spread enough the hash on more than one pool controlled by them

[Ultrafinery]

Again. mining alts is not bitcoin mining. No more than coal mining is bitcoin mining.
If I mine coal or BBQ coins outside of China, this doesn't help Bitcoin decentralization one bit. I don't confirm Bitcoin transactions when I mine coal or altcoins. I do not solve Bitcoin blocks.
There really should be a "Spam Your Shit Signature Ads Here, Asshole!" section on this forum.

i don't care about mining 100% decentralization, because it was an utopia since the beginning, and the current scenario was intended by satoshi, so it's fine

I don't know how to explain this to you any simpler: Altcoin mining could be profitable, but so could coal mining. Neither altcoin mining nor coal mining have anything to do with Bitcoin mining, which is what this thread's about.

if you had the patience to read below, i explained why they are more akin, because they are basically the same thing, working only on a different chain, so no coal mine has nothing to do with bitcoin, you don't do it with the same hw

you can still mine bitcoin with cpu and gpu, the same you do with alt, it's just not profitable, which is a different thing

FFS Do you understand that this thread is about Bitcoin centralization, not altcoin centralization or coal mining centralization? How does altcoin mining affect Bitcoin centralization any more than coal mining does?

Re. "can still mine bitcoin with cpu and gpu": No one does that, so moot.

i think you missed the part were i said it was intended, by satoshi so it's no longer a problem

also with altcoin mining more people can actually mine bitcoin(indirectly), this mean that the bitcoin distrubution(from mining) is still decentralized, which is what matter in the end

There is no such thing as "mining bitcoin inderectly," that's just meaningless lingo.
You mine Bitcoin or you don't.

And no, Satoshi didn't "intend" for Bitcoin to be controlled by a handful of people who get together and decide which way shit's gonna fly on a handshake. That's more made-up bullshit.

it's still bitcoin distribution, done via mining on different chain, different fork

If you still can't understand why mining altcoins is irrelevant to Bitcoin centralization, I got nothing. GG if trolling & not really stupid. Either way, enjoy being the first (and hopefully only) one on my ignore list

there is no centralization untill we come to a 51% by a single pool, if you can not udnerstand this, then there is no point continuing this discussion

good luck thinking that minign is centralized, because it is not

Nah, when one pool controls 51%, that would not be centralization. That would be a sign that the guy running the pool is an idiot. Anyone with half a brain would just start another pool, which he'll also control.
There's exactly zero evidence that this is not currently happening, or can't be exploited when the time is right.

you should bring evidence that this is happening not the opposite, the burden of proof is on who make the assumption

also he can not start another pool out of thin air, you know that a pool require a good infrastructure behind it that is not free, he can't just hope that magically, the miners will come and mine to pay the fee, for the cost of the server etc...

I tell you that "There's exactly zero evidence that this is not currently happening," and you think "the burden of proof is on who make the assumption"? What, exactly, do you want me to prove here? That I have no evidence?

Finally, a pool requires no more "infrastructure" than an ordinary server with an interweb connection. And it's not a bunch of home miners with USB sticks we're talking about here, but a few factory farms. Which the pool operator also owns/is invested in. Do you know *anything* about mining?

there is also zero evidence that is happening, which you should provide, before claiming such possibility...

he need server and a very good connection, do you think he can have that server for free? also do you think that miners will spread their miners to his pool magically? please stop the bullshit

also there is no evidence that pool operator are owning enough miners to spread enough the hash on more than one pool controlled by them

Lol, I should prove to you that "There's exactly zero evidence that this is not currently happening"? You don't believe me? Because you feel that there is evidence of this happening?

And you're telling me a server isn't free? Compared to the millions invested in mining gear to control more than 51% of bitcoin's hashrate, it might as well be. How old are you, BTW?

[rapazev]

Why would the fact that China is basically controlling mining do anything to Bitcoin?

Exactly my point...
What would they do? turn off and screw their investments? do a big dump?

I'm pretty sure bitcoin will eventually die, like any other technology we have. They are constantly changing.... and at some point china will not be a problem.

[Attack.of.the.Clones]

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~

ecosystem is too fluid, can never say btc is destroyed ... never

[Amph]

Lol, I should prove to you that "There's exactly zero evidence that this is not currently happening"? You don't believe me? Because you feel that there is evidence of this happening?

And you're telling me a server isn't free? Compared to the millions invested in mining gear to control more than 51% of bitcoin's hashrate, it might as well be. How old are you, BTW?

yes you make claim without proof, this is like shooting bullshit you know, you need to prove that there is an evidence that the same guy might running two pool because he then want to perform a 51% in the future at the right time liek you said

cheap talking calling the age of other, it's not relevant stay on the discussion....server aren't free, investing in them just because one guy want to do a 51% by hoping that miners will spread their hash on his second server equally, it's retarded

also more miners connected to the server more ram you need, i doubt one server alone can sustain 20% of the hashrate

[Ultrafinery]

^You're either irreparably stupid, insane, or trolling. /ignored.

[CoinsRoyal]

Why do people say that Bitcoin is destroyed or dead. First I only thought that is was because of the price being to stable for to long and people just becoming lazy.
But now I see that there is a whole other reason behind it. 

[sockpuppet1]

http://i64.tinypic.com/14mb7fo.jpghttp://i67.tinypic.com/j7rqz6.jpg

Likewise, the 51% fear is overblown.

Chinese Miner A: We have hundreds of millions of dollars invested in bitcoin mining. Let's form a cartel to execute 51% attacks!
Chinese Miner B: Yes! We'll be able to double-spend whenever we want! People will be helpless as we rip off other bitcoin users with our control of 51% of the network!
Chinese Miner C: Yes! And won't it be a wonderful thing when disillusioned and panicking bitcoin users all dump their coins in response to our attacks!

The type of 51% attack that the Chinese mining cartel has ALREADY done on Bitcoin is they are making the decision what the protocol changes will be for the block chain, thus as I had explained in my prior comments upthread, they can constrict the block size so that we pay through the nose in higher transaction fees. So they can extract more from the Bitcoin ecosystem than the $1 million per day they are already stealing from us with "creating coins out-of-thin air".

It amazes me how fucking stupid you guys are.

How has bitcoin been destroyed? I think that bitcoin is still up and running and that there is nothing wrong with it yet.

Why is saying everyone that the bitcoin is going to be destroyed that's such a bullshit. Don't think
he will ever be destroyed there are always people who want's to use him. So don't say to many
bullshit.

The point of the OP is not that Bitcoin will stop functioning or that the price will decline. The point is that Bitcoin is destroyed in the sense of is not a fix for all the bad things that fiat does to society, because a centralized Bitcoin will have all the same evils as fiat.

Please review my prior comments upthread which provided more detail on this, which you can find linked below after my rebuttal to fuckenidiot.

Incorrect. You are ignoring part of the logic as to why the fascist command economy in China is facilitating the bitCON:

The only relevance of China, is that China has the right Communist corruption to facilitate building these ASIC mining farms with much lower cost, because the electricity is likely subsidized at near 0 cost to the miner by the State. For example, the $billions spent by the taxpayers to construct the environmental disaster Three Gorges Dam (actually in China the tax is the low interest rate paid on savings accounts offered by State controlled banking which the LGUs then borrow at near 0%). The ostensible fact that China is a totalitarian/fascist command economy is relevant in the sense that it means the owners of the mining farms are necessarily beholden to the Communist Party leaders and their commands.

[...]

 Replace "China" with "USA" and Three Gorges with Hoover.  Notice nothing changes, except of course your claims of "fascism" and central control ring much more true in the police state.  Fiat and fascism leave misery and environmental destruction in their wake but that is neither here nor there for this discussion.

I never argued that the centralization wouldn't be a problem if it was occurring in the USA.

I specifically stated that geographic location is irrelevant. I've requoted my prior comments for you at the bottom of this message to refresh your memory.

They blocked Bitcoin Classic and XT and appear to be deciding for the us that SegWit is the protocol hard fork that will be forced on all of us. And there is not a damn thing any of us can or will do about it. Note the Great Firewall (GFW) of China is not a valid argument to be against larger blocks, because the pool server could be located outside and only the hash of the block needs to be sent across the GFW.

"They" didn't decide anything apart from what software "they" would run, for any value of "they".

The Chinese mining cartel was instrumental in deciding what size blocks we will have in Bitcoin and when. The Chinese mining cartel is thus controlling the protocol changes in Bitcoin.

Running another wallet won't help you. Your inaction and lack of understanding means they can put the Trojan Horse in and then there is nothing more we can do about it. We are screwed. You are very much a sheep and I hope you remain a sheep for the rest of your life. I won't be able to stop the fact that the masses like you are dumber than horse shit. That is why the-powers-that-be don't care if I warn you all here. They know you readers are sheep and will always be sheep. They laugh. I am starting to laugh at you all too. I tried my best to explain to you all, and instead I get these inane replies. Sorry if my reply is ad hominem. I really prefer to not think you are dumber than horse shit. I really do. You don't afford me that opportunity. I am frustrated. I give up. I will not talk to you fools any more. Have it your way.

LOLK.  They can put a trojan horse in what exactly now?  If nobody runs their software, who cares what's in it?

The versioned fork goes into the protocol of the block chain. You can't avoid it by running another wallet, because you are at the mercy of the protocol that the 51% decide to honor since they can ban any blocks from the 49%. You are ignorant of the technological issues involved here. Please go take a Bitcoin 101 class.

BitCON is also a privately issued corporate scrip issued to a few owners of mining farms. The electricity is charged to the taxpayer, not to the-powers-that-be which defacto "own" these mining farms.

Dude I have a list of every coinfiat ever mined.  You have access to that list as well.  That's what public coinfiat means.  What the everliving fuck?  Privately issued???!??  The public coinfiat known as BTC runs on excess free electricitydigits as it always has.

ftfy, dufus.

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.

I wrote two longish posts upthread with many rebuttals and explanations:

1. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1465136.msg14789764#msg14789764
2. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1465136.msg14793818#msg14793818

The community's posts that have followed are indicative that most people are naive and easily duped. It boggles my mind how readers have misconstrued the situation.

Let me try again to unravel all your egregious misunderstandings.

• Geographical Location Is Irrelevant: please stop making the inane disingenuous strawman alleging this thread is concerned about where the concentration of hashing power is located. The problem is that the economies-of-scale of profitable proof-of-work forces the concentration the mining control into a few ASIC mining farms. I explained why this is technically and economically inexorable and unavoidable in my prior two posts, which are linked for you above. The only relevance of China, is that China has the right Communist corruption to facilitate building these ASIC mining farms with much lower cost, because the electricity is likely subsidized at near 0 cost to the miner by the State. For example, the $billions spent by the taxpayers to construct the environmental disaster Three Gorges Dam (actually in China the tax is the low interest rate paid on savings accounts offered by State controlled banking which the LGUs then borrow at near 0%). The ostensible fact that China is a totalitarian/fascist command economy is relevant in the sense that it means the owners of the mining farms are necessarily beholden to the Communist Party leaders and their commands.
• Bitcoin Has Already Been 51% Attacked: to argue that the oligarchy of miners and mining pools in China won't abuse their control is disingenuous because they already have! They blocked Bitcoin Classic and XT and appear to be deciding for the us that SegWit is the protocol hard fork that will be forced on all of us. And there is not a damn thing any of us can or will do about it. Note the Great Firewall (GFW) of China is not a valid argument to be against larger blocks, because the pool server could be located outside and only the hash of the block needs to be sent across the GFW. So please stop the inane argument that they won't 51% attack BitCON when they have already done so. Ostensibly the reason they are supporting SegWit is because what the miners want is the ability to constrict the block size so that they can maximize transaction fees at the maximum level the market will bear, i.e. maximize the equation: (fees per transaction) × (transaction rate). They obviously won't allow transaction fees to go so high that no one uses BitCON any more, i.e. they will allow block size to increase in a constricted controlled increase in order to maximize the aforementioned equation, but they also will make sure they extract more than the $1million a day they are extracting from our pockets now. Through their bankster friends system, I posit they effectively bought off Blockstream by indirectly providing Blockstream's $70 million in vulture capital funding, in order to insure the necessary control over BitCON's protocol. It's a "I'll scratch your back, if you scratch mine" network often referred to colloquially as The Bilderberg Group. We tinfoil hats complain about how the government steals from us with fiat inflation, yet then we don't complain when the oligarchy of miners are doing the same thing! We are so gullible and stoopid, it is not surprising that the-powers-that-be think we are useless eaters and cattle fodder.
• Segregrated Witness Includes A Diabolical Trojan Horse: the technology for scaling in SegWit is dubious, but that is not the major issue of concern with it. Instead of issuing SegWit has a normal hard fork which miners can vote on by which protocol they mine, Blockstream (Bitcoin core devs) is changing the Bitcoin protocol in such a way that in the future they can introduced versioned "soft fork" changes to the protocol. This is actually very diabolical if you think carefully about it. What this means is that there can exist transactions on the block chain which can only be handled by a miner who supports the version of the protocol which that transaction was signed to. So while they label this as a "soft fork", meaning that it is optional for miners, in reality it is a very insidious way of forcing a hard fork on all miners because little-by-little new transactions are written to the new version of the protocol and then miners who don't switch to the new version can't process the newer transactions. So in effect this puts Blockstream in control of the protocol of Bitcoin and we the users basically lose our power to rally a political decision about a hard fork. Why? Because insidious changes are very difficult for people to rally a group to defend against. This is a very clever paradigm of divide-and-conquer that was employed by the Rothschilds and Rockefellers. They always want to destroy you insidiously while you are not aware. And I believe my criticism is the underlying real reason that Gregory Maxwell is nuking my posts and fighting me. Apparently theymos is also corrupt, or has been hoodwinked by the Gman.
• Decentralization Is The Only Difference From Fiat: those who argue that decentralization is not that important, are in effect arguing that fiat is acceptable. Those who argue that "Satoshi" intended Bitcoin to centralize over time are probably correct. "Satoshi" may have even intentionally put a back door in BitCON. I also argue that "Satoshi Nakamoto" is the House of Morgan's creation, he is not one person but rather a diabolical group, and BitCON was designed to con those tinfoil hat geeks who want "a better gold". Did you not read the Bitcoin white paper carefully where it seems to attack the existing system of financial institutions for internet transactions in the first page and then in distribution section it pitches BitCON as a better gold. The white paper wasn't an academic only paper, but also a very well targeted marketing advertisement. That you all idolize Satoshi as giving us some great technological gift is all the more hilarious, because obviously "Satoshi" did not solve the Byzantine Generals Problem, and he gave us a profitable proof-of-work design which MUST centralize. However there is another wrinkle to this. The design Satoshi gave us, leads TPTB_need_war to a new design which is UNprofitable proof-of-work, and that design may not centralize (so easily). So it is possible that while I believe "Satoshi Nakamoto" was a secret group formed by the-powers-that-be to siphon $1 million a day from the tinfoil hat crowd, it is possible that one of those intelligent men working in that group actually expected that maybe someone would be resourceful enough to figure out how to fix the design. So in that way, maybe the good spirit of human kind is still in play.
  
  AnonyMint warned you all about this when he first joined this forum in March 2013. The-powers-that-be have a golden rule by which they abide. They always warn you of their plans, and this is so you sheep have your free will. They know damn well that you sheep are too asleep and disorganized to do anything to stop them.
• Bitcoin Can't Be Fixed: those who are deluded into thinking that Bitcoin could somehow morph and be fixed from its current design and circumstance, are dumber than horse shit. Do I really need to explain.   Fixing Bitcoin with all the ingrained inertia and vested interests is equivalent to those who argue that the governments can be fixed and that world won't collapse into a horrific global debt implosion Minsky Moment roughly 2018. These are the same type of people who don't put plywood on their windows when a hurricane is approaching and then blame for FEMA for not rescuing them.

[DooMAD]

I posted this over a year ago when someone else was soiling themselves about a potential Chinese takeover and I'm pretty sure the same applies here:

Just because they happen to reside in the same arbitrary borders, doesn't mean they're some sort of hive-mind colluding to take over.  Stop jumping at shadows.  Also slightly disgusted with the double standard that no one cared when it was any other country with the largest hash rate (since there's obviously always going to be one with a higher hash rate than the others), but now just because it's China we should sound the alarm?  Are you trying to come across as racists or something?

The paid propagandists such as DooMAD will come here and try to appeal to the angst that non-Americans feel towards being bullied around by America, and in general the angst that oppressed people feel which is often labeled "racism" even when the oppression is not associated with race but rather other factors.

So the game DooMAD is playing with your minds, is he wants to switch off your pre-frontal cortex by spiking your cortisol to sway your attention away from the facts I presented, by inciting you to focus on your hate of oppression.

What he doesn't tell you is that China's fascist command economy is oppressing its own people! And has been since at least the time of Mao in the 1950s wherein 57 million Chinese peasants were slaughtered to make way for the globalist funded Communism.

We are always being turned against each other and take our eyes off the true source of the our problems.

DooMAD I don't know how you can look at yourself in the mirror.

No, I'm pretty sure even people in the US should be recognising this as the toxic, paranoid, prejudiced, xenophobic drivel it is.  I can assure you I feel no non-American angst, nor am I attempting to instil it in others.  You can't rationally claim that a certain group of people within a set border are a problem whilst also stating that geographic location is irrelevant.  Unless, y'know, you're insane, which I'm not ruling out as a possibility.

Also, fun fact, not everyone in China is a communist, you stereotyping screwball.



Oh, nearly forgot:

*Disclaimer* This is an AnonyMint / TheFascistMind / UnunoctiumTesticles / contagion / TPTB_need_war / sockpuppet1 related thread (seriously, how many more accounts are you going to make?  One for each personality disorder you suffer from?) likely to contain unrealistic and purely hypothetical scenarios that may be closer to fiction than any semblance of reality, along with false logic and copious amounts of clutching at straws.

[ricardobs]

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

I think now about 75% of bitcoins are mined and very sooner all of the bitcoins will be mined, I think, so then we should have to care that who is mining it. We just have to adopt the bitcoin for our use, in the coming future the power will be with those who have adopted it.

[Cryddit]

also he can not start another pool out of thin air, you know that a pool require a good infrastructure behind it that is not free, he can't just hope that magically, the miners will come and mine to pay the fee, for the cost of the server etc...

WTF?  Seriously?  How stupid do you think a pool owner would have to be to have that problem?  The problem is caused by him already having too much infrastructure, and if he's smarter than a post it's the obvious solution.

Pool owner:  Oh noes, my massive server farm is now providing 48 per cent of bitcoin hashing!  If someone else drops out for even an hour or so I risk annoying all those clowns who don't want to see one pool with 51%, and might not be able to dump bitcoins for as much money!

Pool Owner's IT guy:  No problem, let me reconfigure a bit, and you'll be two pools each with 24 percent of bitcoin hashing.  Or, y'know, we could call larry down the street who's got 20% of bitcoin hashing power and put, say, a third of our servers on his pool.  

Pool owner:  Oh, I didn't think of that because I have the IQ of a post!  Cool!  That way I can go on buying more servers!

IT guy:  You know, there's some other profitable shit you and Larry can do with 78% of the hashing power, if you're not too obvious about it....

Pool owner:  Awesome!  I didn't think of that, either!  'Cause I have the IQ of a post!  Oh, look!  Squirrel!

[beerlover]

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.

The first thing is that bitcoin is really uncontrollable by any specific power and if any power want to involve in it  with full potential then it will be a great support to bitcoin, I will say that someone among the major power have to come forward to give strength to bitcoin.