Bitcoin IS basically DESTROYED

[sockpuppet1]

Hey guys I have a question that just popped up in my mind. What if the price of Bitcoin doesn't increase much after the halving and with the cut in half block rewards and increasing difficulty, do you think the Chinese miners will go bankrupt or they will manage to break even and get a slight profit? Can the Chinese government offer the mining farms preferential electricity pricing lower than the average for the country?

The first to go bankrupt are the marginal miners, not the ones with the lowest electricity costs and the highest efficiencies due to very large economies-of-scale in mining farms.

The halving will INCREASE the centralization of Bitcoin's hashrate (to China's mining farms), not decrease it.

Satoshi designed the distribution curve this way. Who is your hero, who is your daddy who sold you to the banksters?

Exactly because their leveraged obligations and margin calls are in cash. And that is not Bitcoin "cash".

I don't think you're taking into account what demographic is actually being "squeezed" in a liquidity crunch.  The people who own most of these things (BTC) are already rich in the first place and have no debt.  The people who aren't rich and own them have some totally insignificant amount.

The real people getting squeezed are the middle class Americans with McMansions, private schools, and cars they can't afford.  What is the common denominator of that group?  They all own stocks and none of them own Bitcoin.  People on the bottom and middle are the ones being squeezed.  Stocks are mainstream, Bitcoin and gold aren't.  Therefore, the stock dump will be horrific while things such as Bitcoin, as long as the confidence level is high (from 12.5 block reward halving bubble gains) will not only not go down, but will probably be going up as a safe haven from banks that will Cyprus you because Bitcoin is cash without counterparty risk.

Well I lately more and more realize that Bitcoin is a funnel where n00bs come in to buy and miners cash out. The stalwarts don't buy more, as they are few in number and already have their big portion.

So an interruption in the stream of n00bs might have a domino deleveraging effect, since many people loan their BTC short to earn extra revenue.

Leverage may be hiding where you think you see only HODLers.

Also with the halving and marginal miners not wanting to turn their ASICs into door stops, they may be in a more strained position and need to deleverage in a contagion.

There is leverage from lending BTC for income, but if holders fear counterparty risk and instead pull their coins off exchanges that will only squeeze the shorts and drive the price higher, potentially much higher. I don't think anyone really knows how much short leverage is out there.

If they fear counterparty risk, they will cause a stampede and cause counterparty defaults.

The slowdown in buying from n00bs, can cause the price to drop, which will cause the enriched shorts to pile on (cash out their initial investment and gamble the profits) overshooting to the lower low bottom. Plus all the copycats chasing the trend especially with the "world is falling down" hysteria.

V bottom on steriods. Buy the bottom same as in 2009.

Look guys it is very simple. Bitcoin is not the fiat that everyone uses as their unit-of-account, thus fiat up, Bitcoin down just like every other speculative (hot money) asset in a liquidity crunch.

People invest in Bitcoin to make money, not to hold it as a heirloom. Thus when shorting becomes the new profit trend, the speculators chase the trend. The loaners of BTC raise their rates. Everybody is happy. Bitcoin goes down.

2008 took silver from $21 to $9. Bitcoin is more volatile than silver.

Come on guys, Bitcoin is not cash. That is the dumbest thing I've ever read. Bitcoin is a crypto gambler's addiction. Period. You guys need to get out and get some fresh air and look at yourselves more objectively.

[1715067999]

1715067999

[1715067999]

1715067999

[1715067999]

1715067999

[1715067999]

1715067999

[DooMAD]

You are disingenuously spreading lies and you know it.

It has been explained to you numerous times that it is not the pools that are the only point of centralization but also the mining farms. There is one cattle farmer in China who is investing in a mining farm large enough to mine 30% of all BTC that is stolen from us via printing-coins-out-of-thin-air (aka coinbase block reward) to pay miners.

Also it is entirely illogical to claim that cartels and oligarchies do not cooperate with each other, when in fact all throughout history of mankind they always do, because it is the only way they can control the pricing and reap more profit for themselves. It has already been explained to you numerous times that the Chinese mining cartel prevented the timely increase of the block size by refusing to mine on Bitcoin Classic or XT. This is because they prefer to support Blockstream's Segregated Witness which will provide much smaller and delayed block size increases, so that they can drive transaction fees sky high. Also they support Blockstream's SegWit, because it changes the Bitcoin block chain protocol in such a way (insidious soft fork versioning) as it will make it virtually impossible for anyone to stop the mining cartel from changing the protocol in the future at-will.

Thus the Chinese mining cartel is already speaking and acting as a cooperating oligarchy and they have already 51% attacked Bitcoin's protocol, when they blocked the block size increases which would have kept our transaction fees low.

This is very dangerous for our future, because it means in the future when the Chinese government says to these mining farms in China (which control more than 50% of Bitcoin's network hashrate) that they must change the protocol to require that every transaction include a signed government issued identification number or that every signed transaction must include a tax contribution to China or the world government, then the miners will have no choice but to comply because otherwise they will find their $100 millions investment in mining equipment padlocked and confiscated by the government.

What kind of delusional fantasy world do you live in DooMAD.

Really?  In both threads?  Someone likes the sound of their own voice.  

I guess I'll copy and paste my reply here then, as I've already replied in the other thread where the post you're quoting actually appears:

It has been explained to you numerous times that it is not the pools that are the only point of centralization but also the mining farms. There is one cattle farmer in China who is investing in a mining farm large enough to mine 30% of all BTC that is stolen from us via printing-coins-out-of-thin-air (aka coinbase block reward) to pay miners.

Still not 51%, though, is it.  There is no individual with more than 51% of the hash rate.  So again, unless you're working under the assumption (because you have no proof) of collusion, then there is no issue.  There is no lie present in what I've said.  Just your wild accusations of ill intent.

Also it is entirely illogical to claim that cartels and oligarchies do not cooperate with each other, when in fact all throughout history of mankind they always do, because it is the only way they can control the pricing and reap more profit for themselves. It has already been explained to you numerous times that the Chinese mining cartel prevented the timely increase of the block size by refusing to mine on Bitcoin Classic or XT.

I support a larger blocksize too, but just because that didn't get enough support from miners, it doesn't automatically prove beyond all doubt that they're colluding to achieve that result.  You are speculating.  Guessing.  Assuming.  You have no definitive proof of collusion.

This is very dangerous for our future, because it means in the future when the Chinese government says to these mining farms in China (which control more than 50% of Bitcoin's network hashrate) that they must change the protocol to require that every transaction include a signed government issued identification number or that every signed transaction must include a tax contribution to China or the world government, then the miners will have no choice but to comply because otherwise they will find their $100 millions investment in mining equipment padlocked and confiscated by the government.

And in the highly unlikely event that were to happen, the rest of us would happily let them fork away to mine an empty chain that none of us would be transacting on.  You can take off your "The end is nigh" sandwich board now.

 

What kind of delusional fantasy world do you live in DooMAD.

The one that makes a hell of a lot more sense than the delusional fantasy world you're from.

[mayax]

Hey guys I have a question that just popped up in my mind. What if the price of Bitcoin doesn't increase much after the halving and with the cut in half block rewards and increasing difficulty, do you think the Chinese miners will go bankrupt or they will manage to break even and get a slight profit? Can the Chinese government offer the mining farms preferential electricity pricing lower than the average for the country?

The first to go bankrupt are the marginal miners, not the ones with the lowest electricity costs and the highest efficiencies due to very large economies-of-scale in mining farms.

The halving will INCREASE the centralization of Bitcoin's hashrate (to China's mining farms), not decrease it.

Satoshi designed the distribution curve this way. Who is your hero, who is your daddy who sold you to the banksters?

Exactly because their leveraged obligations and margin calls are in cash. And that is not Bitcoin "cash".

I don't think you're taking into account what demographic is actually being "squeezed" in a liquidity crunch.  The people who own most of these things (BTC) are already rich in the first place and have no debt.  The people who aren't rich and own them have some totally insignificant amount.

The real people getting squeezed are the middle class Americans with McMansions, private schools, and cars they can't afford.  What is the common denominator of that group?  They all own stocks and none of them own Bitcoin.  People on the bottom and middle are the ones being squeezed.  Stocks are mainstream, Bitcoin and gold aren't.  Therefore, the stock dump will be horrific while things such as Bitcoin, as long as the confidence level is high (from 12.5 block reward halving bubble gains) will not only not go down, but will probably be going up as a safe haven from banks that will Cyprus you because Bitcoin is cash without counterparty risk.

Well I lately more and more realize that Bitcoin is a funnel where n00bs come in to buy and miners cash out. The stalwarts don't buy more, as they are few in number and already have their big portion.

So an interruption in the stream of n00bs might have a domino deleveraging effect, since many people loan their BTC short to earn extra revenue.

Leverage may be hiding where you think you see only HODLers.

Also with the halving and marginal miners not wanting to turn their ASICs into door stops, they may be in a more strained position and need to deleverage in a contagion.

There is leverage from lending BTC for income, but if holders fear counterparty risk and instead pull their coins off exchanges that will only squeeze the shorts and drive the price higher, potentially much higher. I don't think anyone really knows how much short leverage is out there.

If they fear counterparty risk, they will cause a stampede and cause counterparty defaults.

The slowdown in buying from n00bs, can cause the price to drop, which will cause the enriched shorts to pile on (cash out their initial investment and gamble the profits) overshooting to the lower low bottom. Plus all the copycats chasing the trend especially with the "world is falling down" hysteria.

V bottom on steriods. Buy the bottom same as in 2009.

Look guys it is very simple. Bitcoin is not the fiat that everyone uses as their unit-of-account, thus fiat up, Bitcoin down just like every other speculative (hot money) asset in a liquidity crunch.

People invest in Bitcoin to make money, not to hold it as a heirloom. Thus when shorting becomes the new profit trend, the speculators chase the trend. The loaners of BTC raise their rates. Everybody is happy. Bitcoin goes down.

2008 took silver from $21 to $9. Bitcoin is more volatile than silver.

Come on guys, Bitcoin is not cash. That is the dumbest thing I've ever read. Bitcoin is a crypto gambler's addiction. Period. You guys need to get out and get some fresh air and look at yourselves more objectively.

China already owns over 80% from the miners . The chinesse exchangers are owning around of 95% from trading volume too

Of course, the price is manipulated on how the exchanger's cartel wants and the stupids/blinds people are saying:  "BTC belongs to US" )

[funkenstein]

比特币真的死了！

美国有比特币，美国有intel 也有比世界的半好多。

美国是比特币的王，比特币死了。买莱特币 ：）

</sarcasm>

[BADecker]

Bitcoin doesn't need fixing. Why not? Because it was really never meant to be a currency. What was it meant to be? Bitcoin was meant to be a centralizer for contracting. Here's what I mean.

We all have the right to contract with each other. But if we want to contract with somebody in some form of major investment, we need to go through some government controlled operation, like the New York Stock Exchange, for example.

The great benefit of Bitcoin lies in the things that Counterparty, Colored Coins, Mastercoin, Ethereum, and a whole lot of other companies that ride on the Bitcoin blockchain are doing. These companies, and the Internet, are opening up free but safe contracting to all kinds of people in all kinds of ways through the centralized thing that Bitcoin is.

How long will it take to mine all the bitcoins? That's how long there will be freedom to use these other companies that are building and maintaining secure trading and contracting in a host of ways, all on the Bitcoin blockchain. And this field of endeavor has just seen a few hints of the beginning of the gigantic contracting thing that it could become.

Look at and think about the details of Counterparty, Colored Coins, and Ethereum. Then set your imagination to work in figuring out how the operations and services of these companies can free your business from government limitations in ways that could never be done without Bitcoin.

[pawel7777]

Bitcoin doesn't need fixing. Why not? Because it was really never meant to be a currency
...

Would you kindly remind us all what's the title of the Bitcoin whitepaper?

ps Your entire post is off topic.

[ZOOM007]

To say that bitcoin is destroyed because a certain country controls the majority of the hashrate is an overstatement. There are several people outside of China that are mining in Chinese pools out of convenience, fact of the matter is that Chinese pools are very competitive and run by companies whereas most pools outside of China are smaller operations.  But that doesn't really make that big of a difference, Chinese miners aren't necessarily bad intentioned just because of their location, the fact that bitcoin is receiving so much adoption in a jurisdiction with so much censorship is rather positive.

[sockpuppet1]

He doesn't understand the mathematics of emergence from chaos.

Bitcoin will eventually fix itself. I have as much faith in Bitcoin as I do in mathematics.

Too bad you didn't learn that the universe is composed of partial orders and not a total order. Then you'd understand why every consensus system will become centralized and thus a defacto a fiat.

[funkenstein]

He doesn't understand the mathematics of emergence from chaos.

Bitcoin will eventually fix itself. I have as much faith in Bitcoin as I do in mathematics.

Too bad you didn't learn that the universe is composed of partial orders and not a total order. Then you'd understand why every consensus system will become centralized and thus a defacto a fiat.

Fiat has an unverifiable money supply, no party can ever verify the amount in circulation or how much was created at any moment in the past. 

Broken, centralized, permissioned public shitcoin is different.  We can see how much is there at any point!  We can see if the ledger suddenly has new coin.  Sure, I share your enthusiasm to prevent bitcoin from turning into broken, centralized, permissioned shitcoin but hey - that ain't fiat! 

I don't like people shitting in my living room but I don't need to pretend shit is nuclear waste to make my argument. 

[miscreanity]

The globalist elite are moving us towards a one world reserve currency new world order of control (and Bitcoin won't be the world's reserve currency, but rather is a digital totalitarian currency of global exchange not a reserve currency). China and Singapore will take over power from the West. We are entering a more totalitarian Technocracy world. There will be a smart meter on every home, etc..

Do you expect a basket of currencies as MA has suggested, or something else?

1. I agree doing nothing is not a solution. I am trying to do something, but my design requires that there be very significant transactions since the unprofitable proof-of-work share (not a block solution!) is sent with each transaction. So if I launch the thing with nearly no adoption and just HODLers, then it can be easily attacked by botnets. Thus before I can make the CC, I need to first create something that could drive a lot of demand for the use of the CC.

I came to the same conclusion. In addition, I would argue that anonymity must be incorporated or the system will suffer the same protocol attacks Bitcoin is currently experiencing. Even with anonymity it is possible that protocol erosion could occur.

A technical attack without anonymity could simply filter known addresses (and optionally, linked ones) at the centralised verification level, causing enough delay in transactions that participants will opt for a "new, improved version" that delegates power more directly to centralisation. With anonymity that isn't as easy, but there will probably be enough information gleaned through other methods to target the intended subject.

I'm left wondering whether a ZK routing method wouldn't be more effective. Of course, that might entail rebuilding the Internet as we know it.

That said, unprofitable PoW is currently be the best option enforcing skin-in-the-game.

[katrimans]

Bitcoin is not destoyred

[Rizky Aditya]

I wouldn't say that it is destroyed. But the whole point of Bitcoin is decentralisation, looking at it, China pretty much owns Bitcoin which is definitely not what we want.

[kelsey]

the concept that bitcoin is borderless seems to be beyond most in this threads comprehension 

[boyptc]

I wouldn't say that it is destroyed. But the whole point of Bitcoin is decentralisation, looking at it, China pretty much owns Bitcoin which is definitely not what we want.

I agree with you, if the Chinese people will get most of the bitcoins. Cycle of bitcoins will just rotate to them and it is not good.
Because the supply is only limited and if big percentage of bitcoins were holding by them. They could control the price by selling it to someone if supply doesn't last.

[sockpuppet1]

the concept that bitcoin is borderless seems to be beyond most in this threads comprehension  

When you have comprehended my posts in this thread, then you will realize that being borderless is irrelevant to the point of this thread.

You comment indicates you do not even understand. Perhaps you are too lazy to read and study carefully. Perhaps due to some ideological bias that blinds you.

Fiat has an unverifiable money supply, no party can ever verify the amount in circulation or how much was created at any moment in the past. 

Broken, centralized, permissioned public shitcoin is different.  We can see how much is there at any point!  We can see if the ledger suddenly has new coin.  Sure, I share your enthusiasm to prevent bitcoin from turning into broken, centralized, permissioned shitcoin but hey - that ain't fiat!

Indeterminate money supply is not the attribute that allows us to use the term fiat. Fiat means someone else is in control.

fi·at
ˈfēət,ˈfēˌät/
noun
noun: fiat; plural noun: fiats

    a formal authorization or proposition; a decree.

[LoyceV]

Ah I misread the Google quote as "kilowatt hour" and rather it is referring to annual consumption. Still 1/100th is still a small fraction.

You're kidding, right? 1% of the electricity consumption of a country with more than a billion people is HUGE! It is a whole lot of power plants wasting their energy into something that can basically be done by 1 PC.
Without redoing the math for myself I assume the 5.6 GW is correct. See if you can get a tour in a 1 GW coal fired power plant, it is a huge facility where you can really feel the power.
Especially in China that also means lots of people will die for mining bitcoin: the miners who work in real life coal mines and do IRL mining.
Not a pleasant scenario.

[Rizky Aditya]

Ah I misread the Google quote as "kilowatt hour" and rather it is referring to annual consumption. Still 1/100th is still a small fraction.

You're kidding, right? 1% of the electricity consumption of a country with more than a billion people is HUGE! It is a whole lot of power plants wasting their energy into something that can basically be done by 1 PC.
Without redoing the math for myself I assume the 5.6 GW is correct. See if you can get a tour in a 1 GW coal fired power plant, it is a huge facility where you can really feel the power.
Especially in China that also means lots of people will die for mining bitcoin: the miners who work in real life coal mines and do IRL mining.
Not a pleasant scenario.

Yeah 1 percent of over 1 billion is a fucking shit tonne. I really have no idea what you are talking about? Is 5.6 GW 1 percent?

[Druze]

i dont think china would do anything to damage bitcoin if they control so much it seems like they would hurt themselves more than anyone else

[Viyamore]

i dont think china would do anything to damage bitcoin if they control so much it seems like they would hurt themselves more than anyone else

Maybe ? Yes in the first place they are the on who first to hurt if they do damage bitcoins , but there's a chance that if they do that they are the only who will doesn't affected whatever they wil do .they will do more for them to earn much more..

[sockpuppet1]

The Devastation that man wrecks on himself (in short society is a power vacuum that requires a strong tyrant to beat the men into not defecting from the good of society):

Change the record you're boring

This forum has turned into a circus of lies and ponzi scams speculation:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1219023.msg14853958#msg14853958 (Vcash deleted posts)

Do not expect me to market anything which is "fair" to this audience. They don't want fair.

I am okay with that. Peace. You get yours and I'll get mine. That is the new world order you want.

Collectivism is a power vacuum and the argument is always about who gets to steal for and from whom.

Bernie: "Socialism can be repaired as long as I can be in charge of the stealing to insure it is fair".
Trump: "Stealing can be optimized if I am Dicktator-in-chief"
Clinton: "You'll tolerate my theft (for myself and my cronies) because as a Democrat I'll steal some for you too (and not remind you I funded it all by expanding an egregious future debt on your children's back)"

Stealing (scams, oligarchy, etc) is not the exception, rather it is the norm of human nature. Always will be.

The Lord warned us that this is the nature of man.

Don't forget the Iron Law of Political Economics.