About the PoW change

[thejaytiesto]

As we know, Jihan has too much power on the network, and apparently will soon have up to 80% of hashing rate once the new bitmain installations are deployed:

https://cointimes.tech/2017/03/statenationattack/

This mining facility by Bitmain in China (main supporter of BU) will single handedly have 80% hashing power overnight.

80% of the network controlled by a single entity with a very clear agenda. How can you call this decentralized with a straight face? how did satoshi didn't see this coming?

Anyway, the minority chain will obviously get crushed so I don't see any other way out but to change the PoW and render Jihan's monopoly useless.

We will still have the better devs, the problem is, we will have less hashing power.

At that point it all comes down to what the market will value: The better software with less hashing power under a new PoW algo, or the lesser devs with a ton of hashing power (but all concentrated in the hands of the same entity, which doesn't seem very safe regardless of the big hashing power, it would basically be 100% JihanCoin)

We'll see.

Anyway, my main point was: We change to another PoW algo. This makes sense short term for the reasons described above, but what about long term?

Doesn't a new algo create a new arms race to create the new mining machines that will create the new Jihan Wu's? And it will be in China, since they have the cheapest electricity.

So we have a constant here... the cheap electricity of china, that is the key that will keep generating chinese monopolies on a long enough timeline after a PoW algo change.

What can be done about this? Maybe something can be done to not allow a % higher than X inside the same area?
Can the IP's of the mining farms be blocked after X % is exceeded? maybe adjust depending on the electricity of the location of the miners?
anyway I guess IPs are useless nowadays due VPN and whatnot.
What is clear is we need something to avoid massive monopolies to be formed. Monopolies are never good for obvious reasons. We need something to force mining activities to be more widespread and not everything happening in china.
Less hashing power but more widespread mining operations are safer. Similarly, less nodes spread all over the world are safer than a million nodes inside a Coinbase bunker.

I don't know what the f*ck can be done, but the problem is obvious: china will always have the hedge due the ideal mining circumstances: cheap electricity and cheap production of the machines.

[1715695408]

1715695408

[1715695408]

1715695408

[1715695408]

1715695408

[lukew]

I don't have the skill to make it happen, but I have had an idea about a crypto currency that by design does not reward more work, but rather rewards simply being a part of the network and making it work. Things like this could never happen.

[doesit]

the factory looks just a 3d render.china had monopoly for at least couple years now if people didn't notice.that said if BU comes into play,people even hardcore will switch eventually,since everyone in the game are for profits not for whoever controls btc,think sahosis idea ended when private echanges established,not much different from bank or any other entity where to buy btc you have to provide most details,thus what btc was and is now is completely different things even thou every second person on this forum will tell you its not.

that said if chinesse goverment is funding such projects then btc core and devs wont be able to do much,since they have brain power and cash,not to mention population,thus some might boycott it,but competing with 2+billions asians is lost battle,if they decide to make it their own reserve currency.

[thejaytiesto]

the factory looks just a 3d render.china had monopoly for at least couple years now if people didn't notice.

Yeah it's a render, but anyway bitmain is expanding into ridiculous centralization, that's the thing.

that said if BU comes into play,people even hardcore will switch eventually,since everyone in the game are for profits not for whoever controls btc,think sahosis idea ended when private echanges established,not much different from bank or any other entity where to buy btc you have to provide most details,thus what btc was and is now is completely different things even thou every second person on this forum will tell you its not.

About "even hardcore will switch", you are assuming BU will have the bigger price tag. You fail to explain why.

I argue BUcoin will not have the bigger price tag because ultimately the software is the most important part, and Core devs are obviously the better engineers and cryptographs (and they will not move into BU)

Miners are easily replaceable, devs on this very specific field aren't.

Also, like I said before, hashing power concentrated in the hands of a single entity shouldn't give anyone with a brain any sense of security, and you couldn't sell that coin as a decentralized coin anymore.

This is why I think BTC will win and BTU will be a short lived pump and dump. Of course it's yet to see if noobs fear the big hashrate and jump on BTU. We'll see about that.

Private exchanges are irrelevant with this matter. If you want to deal with fiat, you can't cross that gateway into the system's money seamlessly, regulated and private exchanges meet the requirements of some people in order to buy... let them be.
It is optional anyway. You can use private exchanges or you can trade OTC, the protocol works the same.

that said if chinesse goverment is funding such projects then btc core and devs wont be able to do much,since they have brain power and cash,not to mention population,thus some might boycott it,but competing with 2+billions asians is lost battle,if they decide to make it their own reserve currency.

Yes, Jihan Wu is most likely statefunded, but like I said before, all the chinamen have is free electricity, cheap labour and that's about it.
The devs aren't replaceable, they can't never form a team like Core.

And in any case, they can no longer call it bitcoin, since that would be JihanCoin. He would control all the hashrate and hence what gets or doesn't get activated and so on.

[doesit]

protocol is open source to overestimate Chinese is low balling look at your home if your lucky maybe few items aren't made in china,there's nothing they cant overcome.
Thus presuming they have no decent crypto programmers devs,is underestimate,look at all hacks government has strongest cyber army,now if they fund next currency all is possible,btw not saying BU would immediately pick up,but might be next boom like btc at beginning.

Since say many people would switch over,at the end few % that use btc on daily basis,will switch to whatever next vendor accepts and possible to transfer back to fiat.
Since many are worried about profits who just buy to hold it,and split would make quite decent dent in that.

In another thread i mention that never single entity or some mining pool or person should have a say,but actually core devs should be ones to push btc to direction that is good,not give free choice for select few,since id rather trust engineer then some shark when it comes whats best for future.

[vnvizow]

I thought the dude only had 16% (still huge percentage tho). But the change in POW won't change the situation right now, it'll make it worse: all miners are affected and then we have less miners to support the network once the change happens.

[slaveforanunnak1]

protocol is open source to overestimate Chinese is low balling look at your home if your lucky maybe few items aren't made in china,there's nothing they cant overcome.
Thus presuming they have no decent crypto programmers devs,is underestimate,look at all hacks government has strongest cyber army,now if they fund next currency all is possible,btw not saying BU would immediately pick up,but might be next boom like btc at beginning.

Since say many people would switch over,at the end few % that use btc on daily basis,will switch to whatever next vendor accepts and possible to transfer back to fiat.
Since many are worried about profits who just buy to hold it,and split would make quite decent dent in that.

In another thread i mention that never single entity or some mining pool or person should have a say,but actually core devs should be ones to push btc to direction that is good,not give free choice for select few,since id rather trust engineer then some shark when it comes whats best for future.

ohhhh herrrooo

[achimsmile]

I don't have the skill to make it happen, but I have had an idea about a crypto currency that by design does not reward more work, but rather rewards simply being a part of the network and making it work. Things like this could never happen.

There already is such a PoW crypto currency without fees and without miners reward, won't advertise it here because off topic.

[cellard]

I thought the dude only had 16% (still huge percentage tho). But the change in POW won't change the situation right now, it'll make it worse: all miners are affected and then we have less miners to support the network once the change happens.

Any miner that isn't an idiot will not risk their industry into mining a software that is buggy and resorts to closed source patch because their devs are incompetent. So we are going to see miners going to Core's PoW, the ones that don't don't deserve to mine bitcoin anyway, so let them mine their BTU alt.

[hv_]

Are you same critical as to other entities as well?

You know there is blockstream?


How much is invested and at risk?


This looks like a FUD thread. Sorry.

[barrysty1e]

Anyway, my main point was: We change to another PoW algo. This makes sense short term for the reasons described above, but what about long term?

Doesn't a new algo create a new arms race to create the new mining machines that will create the new Jihan Wu's? And it will be in China, since they have the cheapest electricity.

So we have a constant here... the cheap electricity of china, that is the key that will keep generating chinese monopolies on a long enough timeline after a PoW algo change.

luke-jr pitched this some time ago (maybe he was a bit brash about it); but he got shot down like a bucket of bricks. he was on the money but the major players obviously don't want a bar of it.

What can be done about this? Maybe something can be done to not allow a % higher than X inside the same area?
Can the IP's of the mining farms be blocked after X % is exceeded? maybe adjust depending on the electricity of the location of the miners?
anyway I guess IPs are useless nowadays due VPN and whatnot.
What is clear is we need something to avoid massive monopolies to be formed. Monopolies are never good for obvious reasons. We need something to force mining activities to be more widespread and not everything happening in china.
Less hashing power but more widespread mining operations are safer. Similarly, less nodes spread all over the world are safer than a million nodes inside a Coinbase bunker.

you could easily block a set of ip's, but then there are just as many methods to get around that.

I don't know what the f*ck can be done, but the problem is obvious: china will always have the hedge due the ideal mining circumstances: cheap electricity and cheap production of the machines.

they will also have complete control over which tx's get relayed; like they are doing right now, cherry-picking the best ones to go into each block. not to mention antpool still mining empty blocks.

your comments regarding majority of hashpower at one pool interesting.
essentially over 70% of verified blocks come out of china anyway; all behind the GFC (great firewall of china), adding latency between them and the rest of the world.
additionally, its well known that most of these pools run dead miners on one anothers pool for the latest block hash update (even if this hash hasnt been propogated to the network).

i covered this quite well at https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5epa0x/why_the_big_pools_really_dont_want_to_budge_in which promoted a site i was running, that showed when the pools had found a block but hadn't announced it to the world.

i love bitcoin, still use it every day, but due to the infighting and frankly retarded behaviour (particularly reddit users), i don't think it will advance into wide spread use.

[JonHind]

As we know, Jihan has too much power on the network, and apparently will soon have up to 80% of hashing rate once the new bitmain installations are deployed:

https://cointimes.tech/2017/03/statenationattack/

This mining facility by Bitmain in China (main supporter of BU) will single handedly have 80% hashing power overnight.

80% of the network controlled by a single entity with a very clear agenda. How can you call this decentralized with a straight face? how did satoshi didn't see this coming?

Anyway, the minority chain will obviously get crushed so I don't see any other way out but to change the PoW and render Jihan's monopoly useless.

We will still have the better devs, the problem is, we will have less hashing power.

At that point it all comes down to what the market will value: The better software with less hashing power under a new PoW algo, or the lesser devs with a ton of hashing power (but all concentrated in the hands of the same entity, which doesn't seem very safe regardless of the big hashing power, it would basically be 100% JihanCoin)

We'll see.

Anyway, my main point was: We change to another PoW algo. This makes sense short term for the reasons described above, but what about long term?

Doesn't a new algo create a new arms race to create the new mining machines that will create the new Jihan Wu's? And it will be in China, since they have the cheapest electricity.

So we have a constant here... the cheap electricity of china, that is the key that will keep generating chinese monopolies on a long enough timeline after a PoW algo change.

What can be done about this? Maybe something can be done to not allow a % higher than X inside the same area?
Can the IP's of the mining farms be blocked after X % is exceeded? maybe adjust depending on the electricity of the location of the miners?
anyway I guess IPs are useless nowadays due VPN and whatnot.
What is clear is we need something to avoid massive monopolies to be formed. Monopolies are never good for obvious reasons. We need something to force mining activities to be more widespread and not everything happening in china.
Less hashing power but more widespread mining operations are safer. Similarly, less nodes spread all over the world are safer than a million nodes inside a Coinbase bunker.

I don't know what the f*ck can be done, but the problem is obvious: china will always have the hedge due the ideal mining circumstances: cheap electricity and cheap production of the machines.

I agree , but now I accept the BTU AND BTC slit , lets see where this goes in future .
Bitcoin transactions have slowed over the past year and their is a lot of back log in transaction which is not good for business
so supporting roger ver idea but still looking the bandwagon of BTU is filled with noobs and clowns

[kolloh]

80% seems like an awfully high number. However, if it is true, that is not good at all. No one entity should control that much of the mining power.

A change in PoW could become necessary if BitCoin becomes threatened with the possibility of 51% attacks. Miners certainly will be opposed to these types of changes due to the amount they may have invested in their hardware though. Definitely presents another problem for Bitcoin to overcome.

[JonHind]

BTU AND BTC is good , we will see where both of them go in near future

[pawel7777]

>>> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=67.0

[lordoliver]

B$, there is no way getting 80%.

[fitty]

80% seems like an awfully high number. However, if it is true, that is not good at all. No one entity should control that much of the mining power.

A change in PoW could become necessary if BitCoin becomes threatened with the possibility of 51% attacks. Miners certainly will be opposed to these types of changes due to the amount they may have invested in their hardware though. Definitely presents another problem for Bitcoin to overcome.

I doubt they are holding 80% of the mining hash power of bitcoin. Even though it is huge, I only see it holding like 50% of the mining hash power of Bitcoin. However, if that will be the case that they will support he BTU, yeah as stated above bitcoin will be vulnerable to certain attacks. But, as what many are saying. Because Bitcoin is well-known and lots of users are supporting it. If there is a possibility that BTU will overpower Bitcoin, that would take some time or may not happen at all.