/r/btc loons already twisting Antbleed facts to meet their agenda

[franky1]

There is no source. That's the estimate that people believe Bitmain has produced so far. I doubt you could provide a source for any exact number (unless Bitmain publicizes the number of shipped miners, but even that is not enough).

so in short you have just seen the 70% nay sayer /abstainer and just named that your 70% "bitmain" estimate... (facepalm)

You don't have any proof that supports any other views. This is a reasonable estimate considering the current state of the ASIC manufacturing industry. The only one who should facepalm is yourself for your own ignorance.

i guess you missed my subtly in the other post where i said i hope im not too subtle. you may want to re-read it

[1714836455]

1714836455

[1714836455]

1714836455

[Sundark]

https://blog.bitmain.com/en/antminer-firmware-update-april-2017/

draw your own conclusions.

On thing is certain. Bitmain reacted very professionally. They responded promptly and included good, convincing explanations.
There is small problem though, another week and we have more allegations, another discovered bug/backdoor.
How many more bugs are hidden withing their hardware? I wouldn't want to work for Bitmain's PR team now.

[franky1]

On thing is certain. Bitmain reacted very professionally. They responded promptly and included good, convincing explanations.
There is small problem though, another week and we have more allegations, another discovered bug/backdoor.
I wouldn't want to work for Bitmain's PR team now.

gmax is desperate to find directions to point his fingers as to why segwit did not get activated by christmas like most blockstreamists thought would happen.

he cant really blame nodes due to his own back door of going soft, bypassed node consensus. so he has to double down on blaming the pools which HE made the only voters.. as to why they are not 95% yays..

maybe he should ask them "how should/should a 0.15 version be changed and what features should be added to make it a community wide full network uniting upgrade

the 'volume' of trying to use backdoors as an excuse, when his team used backdoors, is getting 'louder' in its hypocrisy

[digaran]

Who manufactured the first ASIC and mined with it? maybe we really need to change the POW to make it anti-ASIC and make it GPU compatible? that way no one could control the mining industry and influence it as much as bitmain is doing right now.
If everyone could mine with GPU then we know who is manufacturing them and there are only 5 big companies making GPU and they have the best technology and their marketcap is much higher than crypto combined so they couldn't be bothered to get personal with the network such as bitcoin and other crypto currencies.
But question remains, who will compensate millions of dollars to those already mining with ASICs?

[franky1]

Who manufactured the first ASIC and mined with it? maybe we really need to change the POW to make it anti-ASIC and make it GPU compatible? that way no one could control the mining industry and influence it as much as bitmain is doing right now.

can you prove bitmain control the mining industry. or are you reading the reddit speculation

1. then its just a ATI vs Geforce.. and everyone starts pointing fingers that ATI has a backdoor efficiency gain called openCL
2. if you think hobbyists can mine in their basements. forget it. farms will buy up THOUSANDS of top end ATI's

If everyone could mine with GPU then we know who is manufacturing them and there are only 5 big companies making GPU and they have the best technology and their marketcap is much higher than crypto combined so they couldn't be bothered to get personal with the network such as bitcoin and other crypto currencies.
But question remains, who will compensate millions of dollars to those already mining with ASICs?

thirdly. there would then be arguments once ATI gpu stocks dry up of "what if ATI are holding onto stock and starting their own farms to control bitcoin"

[The One]

Is there any evidence JW used it?

Nobody ever claimed that it was used. The claim is that it exists, and that is a fact.

I asked (?) for evidence - one generally ask for evidence in order to establish a "picture" of the whole fiasco (whatever).

[Lauda]

Is there any evidence JW used it?

Nobody ever claimed that it was used. The claim is that it exists, and that is a fact.

I asked (?) for evidence - one generally ask for evidence in order to establish a "picture" of the whole fiasco (whatever).

Evidence that it exists? It's in the source code in GitHub.

[FiendCoin]

There is no source. That's the estimate that people believe Bitmain has produced so far. I doubt you could provide a source for any exact number (unless Bitmain publicizes the number of shipped miners, but even that is not enough).

so in short you have just seen the 70% nay sayer /abstainer and just named that your 70% "bitmain" estimate... (facepalm)

So your argument is it don’t matter if bitmain is shady because they don’t produce 70% of miners? What if it was 60% or 50% or 40%, what amount would worry you? Even bitmain don’t dispute the 70% figure so why do you?

You fucking shills crack me up 

[franky1]

So your argument is it don’t matter if bitmain is shady because they don’t produce 70% of miners? What if it was 60% or 50% or 40%, what amount would worry you? Even bitmain don’t dispute the 70% figure so why do you?

You fucking shills crack me up  

here is the laugh.

bitmain wont self destruct their own rigs
bitmain cant self destruct other manufactures rigs

if bitmain did, it would only affect their own hashrates
if bitmain did, it would just cause 2 minutes downtime but end up costing them $2k per unit because everyone would ask for refund/comspnsation
if bitmain agenda was to... they would have already

so its just temporary drama of shooting themselves in the foot if they did fire a gun.. logically less important then things like creating a tier network that ruins the diverse decentralised peer network ethos.

you want to scream blue murder about "if's" and maybe of hardware that can cause only a couple minutes drama.. but avoid talking about the bearded elephant in the room that actually has got deadlines but cant meet promises.. that will affect the network if allowed to continue..

you can try distracting the debate away from what core should do as a plan B by trying to make people look in the direction of mining.. but ultimately devs need a plan B

[digaran]

Who manufactured the first ASIC and mined with it? maybe we really need to change the POW to make it anti-ASIC and make it GPU compatible? that way no one could control the mining industry and influence it as much as bitmain is doing right now.

can you prove bitmain control the mining industry. or are you reading the reddit speculation

1. then its just a ATI vs Geforce.. and everyone starts pointing fingers that ATI has a backdoor efficiency gain called openCL
2. if you think hobbyists can mine in their basements. forget it. farms will buy up THOUSANDS of top end ATI's

If everyone could mine with GPU then we know who is manufacturing them and there are only 5 big companies making GPU and they have the best technology and their marketcap is much higher than crypto combined so they couldn't be bothered to get personal with the network such as bitcoin and other crypto currencies.
But question remains, who will compensate millions of dollars to those already mining with ASICs?

thirdly. there would then be arguments once ATI gpu stocks dry up of "what if ATI are holding onto stock and starting their own farms to control bitcoin"

Well I don't have access to reddit(blocked in my area)not that I have no way to access it no I don't even like it much. I barely follow whatever happens here.
I need to know why are you defending bitmain and BU? I can clearly see that you have some understandings of things and are concern about bitcoin but you are always in the other side but I just say what ever I believe is fact or it's just my opinion.

Can we use ASIC machines for other purposes such as gaming or other computational processes other than hashing sha256?
With GPU you could use them for other things and they existed before bitcoin so unlike ASICs they weren't specifically manufactured just for mining.
Bitmain was established only to build machines focused on one thing and I call that control unless they were in computer hardware before and or now are making other hardware than miners?
ATI wont even bother to build their own GPU farms because they manufacture computer hardware and sell to the market while mining requires at least a year to ROI and that is not a guaranteed fact.

We're here to convince the undecided miners to chose the best option to proceed but we have forgotten the very obvious fact that only those with enough knowledge and understanding of cryptography and code are the ones currently mining and they will manage to figure out the truth for themselves and we're just wasting our times keeping a clean image of crypto.

All we need we already have, bitfury and bitmain 2 big manufacturers and they both will keep each other in line though I wouldn't mind to have a third big company/pool to balance the power, we just need a functioning and stable network the rest are just back ground noise.

[The One]

Is there any evidence JW used it?

Nobody ever claimed that it was used. The claim is that it exists, and that is a fact.

I asked (?) for evidence - one generally ask for evidence in order to establish a "picture" of the whole fiasco (whatever).

Evidence that it exists? It's in the source code in GitHub.

Is there any evidence JW used it?

Pay attention to the word "used." Not exist/claim/fact.

In another word JW has never used it. Yes or no?

[leopard2]

https://blog.bitmain.com/en/antminer-firmware-update-april-2017/

draw your own conclusions.

On thing is certain. Bitmain reacted very professionally. They responded promptly and included good, convincing explanations.
There is small problem though, another week and we have more allegations, another discovered bug/backdoor.
How many more bugs are hidden withing their hardware? I wouldn't want to work for Bitmain's PR team now.

Pardon me? They reacted? They got caught. I am sure this statement would not have been issued if Antlbleed had not been discovered. Yes the explanation is good but that does not mean they are honest. In fact if they had been sincere, this patch would have been issued long ago...

Imagine a CAR MANUFACTURER would do that: car can be remotely disabled. Top secret. When it hits the news, car company claims...this was only to your benefit to prevent theft....and...sure enough...the super altruistic beneficial feature, is removed with a patch the same day it was on the news.

How legit is this?  

[franky1]

I need to know why are you defending bitmain and BU? I can clearly see that you have some understandings of things and are concern about bitcoin but you are always in the other side but I just say what ever I believe is fact or it's just my opinion.

im not just defending BU or bitmain. i defend anything thats not blockstream(core)
things that gets attacked or used as a distraction (point the finger at) to avoid people seeing or questioning blockstream
because although theres all this temporary drama of point the finger how A, B, C maybe, if, could, might do something that lasts 2 minutes. its just distractions from what bitcoin really is.. the code

Can we use ASIC machines for other purposes such as gaming or other computational processes other than hashing sha256?
With GPU you could use them for other things and they existed before bitcoin so unlike ASICs they weren't specifically manufactured just for mining.
Bitmain was established only to build machines focused on one thing and I call that control unless they were in computer hardware before and or now are making other hardware than miners?
ATI wont even bother to build their own GPU farms because they manufacture computer hardware and sell to the market while mining requires at least a year to ROI and that is not a guaranteed fact.

if you think it would be year ROI .. thats for end users based on RETAIL prices.
6 months based on wholesale price (bestbuy starting a mining farm themselves with their bought cost stock)
3 months based on production price(ATI starting a mining farm themselves with their manufactured cost stock)

now imagine for every gpu ATI wholesale they can make 2 gpu's meaning pass one to retailer, keep one at zero cost
meaning ATI could start getting returns instantly because the 2nd gpu which they keep is literally zero cost because the retailer covered the cost with the first gpu via the wholesale price

now imagine for every gpu bestbuy retail they can buy 2 gpu's meaning pass one to retailer customer, keep one at zero cost
meaning bestbuy could start getting returns instantly because the 2nd gpu which they keep is literally zero cost because the customer covered the cost with the first gpu via the retail price

this is where ASIC manufacturers are profiting. it does not cost $2k to make a ASIC.

We're here to convince the undecided miners to chose the best option to proceed but we have forgotten the very obvious fact that only those with enough knowledge and understanding of cryptography and code are the ones currently mining and they will manage to figure out the truth for themselves and we're just wasting our times keeping a clean image of crypto.

yp and when a dev team bypasses node consensus, and only has 33% of pools vote.. then its also devs that should figur out the truth.. that maybe they need to go back to the drawing board and do things that would unite the community.. not point fingers at blaming everyone but themselves

All we need we already have, bitfury and bitmain 2 big manufacturers and they both will keep each other in line though I wouldn't mind to have a third big company/pool to balance the power, we just need a functioning and stable network the rest are just back ground noise.

there is another asic manufacturing company, infact more then one more company.
but all this drama is prtending bitmain have 70% control. which is the illogical part of all this distraction techniques

[leopard2]

Is there any evidence JW used it?

Nobody ever claimed that it was used. The claim is that it exists, and that is a fact.

I asked (?) for evidence - one generally ask for evidence in order to establish a "picture" of the whole fiasco (whatever).

Evidence that it exists? It's in the source code in GitHub.

Is there any evidence JW used it?

Pay attention to the word "used." Not exist/claim/fact.

In another word JW has never used it. Yes or no?

He never used it, no. Same goes for most nukes. It could have been used, for example, to attack the smaller chain after a BU/Segwit split, by shutting down miners that mine for the wrong chain 

[FiendCoin]

I need to know why are you defending bitmain and BU? I can clearly see that you have some understandings of things and are concern about bitcoin but you are always in the other side but I just say what ever I believe is fact or it's just my opinion.

im not just defending BU or bitmain. i defend anything thats not blockstream(core)
things that gets attacked or used as a distraction (point the finger at) to avoid people seeing or questioning blockstream
because although theres all this temporary drama of point the finger how A, B, C maybe, if, could, might do something that lasts 2 minutes. its just distractions from what bitcoin really is.. the code

Can we use ASIC machines for other purposes such as gaming or other computational processes other than hashing sha256?
With GPU you could use them for other things and they existed before bitcoin so unlike ASICs they weren't specifically manufactured just for mining.
Bitmain was established only to build machines focused on one thing and I call that control unless they were in computer hardware before and or now are making other hardware than miners?
ATI wont even bother to build their own GPU farms because they manufacture computer hardware and sell to the market while mining requires at least a year to ROI and that is not a guaranteed fact.

if you think it would be year ROI .. thats for end users based on RETAIL prices.
6 months based on wholesale price
3 months based on production price

now imagine for every gpu they wholesale they can make 2 gpu's meaning
meaning they could start getting returns instantly
because the 2nd gpu which they keep is literally zero cost because the retailer covered the cost with the first gpu via the wholesale price

this is where ASIC manufacturers are profiting. it does not cost $2k to make a ASIC.

We're here to convince the undecided miners to chose the best option to proceed but we have forgotten the very obvious fact that only those with enough knowledge and understanding of cryptography and code are the ones currently mining and they will manage to figure out the truth for themselves and we're just wasting our times keeping a clean image of crypto.

yp and when a dev team bypasses node consensus, and only has 33% of pools vote.. then its also devs that should figur out the truth.. that maybe they need to go back to the drawing board and do things that would unite the community.. not point fingers at blaming everyone but themselves

All we need we already have, bitfury and bitmain 2 big manufacturers and they both will keep each other in line though I wouldn't mind to have a third big company/pool to balance the power, we just need a functioning and stable network the rest are just back ground noise.

there is another asic manufacturing company, infact more then one more company.
but all this drama is prtending bitmain have 70% control. which is the illogical part of all this distraction techniques

It wouldn't matter if bitmain only produced 40% of the miners for Bitcoin, that's still a lot of miners being produced by 1 company and if said company is shady that's a problem.

If bitmain is blocking changes to Bitcoin to protect some secret advantage, that's a problem for ALL of us.

If bitmain has the ability to remotely kill their miners and their miners make up a significant amount of total miners in use, that's a problem for ALL of us.

It is undisputed that they have a lot of influence in the Bitcoin world.

Does it matter if bitmain is shady? The answer should be yes. It should matter a lot, at least to those who wish to see bitcoin prosper.

BTW, bitmain doesn't dispute the 70% producer of miners, why are you trying to?

[franky1]

It wouldn't matter if bitmain only produced 40% of the miners for Bitcoin, that's still a lot of miners being produced by 1 company and if said company is shady that's a problem.

If bitmain is blocking changes to Bitcoin to protect some secret advantage, that's a problem for ALL of us.

If bitmain has the ability to remotely kill their miners and their miners make up a significant amount of total miners in use, that's a problem for ALL of us.

It is undisputed that they have a lot of influence in the Bitcoin world.

Does it matter if bitmain is shady? The answer should be yes. It should matter a lot, at least to those who wish to see bitcoin prosper.

BTW, bitmain doesn't dispute the 70% producer of miners, why are you trying to?

funny part is now your dfending keeping PoW running because killing off 'if 40%' to If 70% would be bad...
hmmmmm
so i should quote you above everytime you mention UASF good or time to change PoW
i do find it funny that one minute mining is bad then asic mining is good

when overall its just social drama to distract the real debate of the code of the bitcoin network that wants to change the network to a cesspit of  a tier network

[FiendCoin]

It wouldn't matter if bitmain only produced 40% of the miners for Bitcoin, that's still a lot of miners being produced by 1 company and if said company is shady that's a problem.

If bitmain is blocking changes to Bitcoin to protect some secret advantage, that's a problem for ALL of us.

If bitmain has the ability to remotely kill their miners and their miners make up a significant amount of total miners in use, that's a problem for ALL of us.

It is undisputed that they have a lot of influence in the Bitcoin world.

Does it matter if bitmain is shady? The answer should be yes. It should matter a lot, at least to those who wish to see bitcoin prosper.

BTW, bitmain doesn't dispute the 70% producer of miners, why are you trying to?

funny part is now your dfending keeping PoW running because killing off 'if 40%' to If 70% would be bad...
hmmmmm
so i should quote you above everytime you mention UASF good or time to change PoW
i do find it funny that one minute mining is bad then asic mining is good

when overall its just social drama to distract the real debate of the code of the bitcoin network that wants to change the network to a cesspit of  a tier network

Are you having some kind of meltdown dude, I can't understand what your trying to say?

I didn't say anything about PoW or UASF or mining bad asic good wtf?

[The One]

Is there any evidence JW used it?

Nobody ever claimed that it was used. The claim is that it exists, and that is a fact.

I asked (?) for evidence - one generally ask for evidence in order to establish a "picture" of the whole fiasco (whatever).

Evidence that it exists? It's in the source code in GitHub.

Is there any evidence JW used it?

Pay attention to the word "used." Not exist/claim/fact.

In another word JW has never used it. Yes or no?

He never used it, no. Same goes for most nukes. It could have been used, for example, to attack the smaller chain after a BU/Segwit split, by shutting down miners that mine for the wrong chain 

It could have - not important. If they did used it for nefarious purposes, i'm sure the victims can sue him.

[unamis76]

The software is public code, hosted on GitHub, as far as I know. From my short incursions to the Mining subsection, I remember seeing modified versions of the software for some devices. The code can, and is probably audited frequently. According to antbleed.com

The commit date for the backdoor kill switch is July 11th, 2016

Why was this only discovered now on the height of the scaling debate?

Having a backdoor is a serious issue and "forgetting" to delete code an even more serious one. If they couldn't develop the feature further, they could have just deleted it entirely. But making this a smear campaign against Bitcoin Unlimited and saying that SegWit supporters were "cooking" this for a while is just outrageous.

With this attitude we're not going anywhere. This has to do with mining, not with scaling. Note that people from both sides are confusing things up to get their propaganda going. Some posts on reddit (both /r/bitcoin and /r/btc) are made with the goal of over-complicating things. This forum is way better but still a bit "twitchy"... Are we going to take advantage of this to make a bigger smear campaign?

[cellard]

What im trying to understand is, how did it take so long for somebody to find out about this? I mean I understand most devs have better things to do, but we are talking about the biggest miner provider, so if I was a bitcoin developer I would be taking great attention to every single pull request on the bitmain github because these guys are always going to try to be a step ahead and try to have a hidden ace of spades that could checkmate the entire network. If this wasn't found in time, they could have made a lot of damage.

If Jihan felt cornered and about to be defeated, im sure he would go down while trying to kill the entire thing, and this was a way to do it. Remember to always think the worst.