And they say Bitmain is the miner we should be worried about...

[jonald_fyookball]

[1715270337]

1715270337

[1715270337]

1715270337

[1715270337]

1715270337

[Holliday]

Beg your pool operator overlords.

[Iranus]

Bitcoin hashrate distribution is currently 4.8% Bitfury and 17.5% Antpool.  BITMAIN owns other pools as well.
Pointing out the evil of one company does not negate the evil of another.  Perhaps you should address the claims directly instead of trying to direct the attention to another pool.

Furthermore, BITMAIN has far more power and influence than Bitfury does.

[jonald_fyookball]

Bitcoin hashrate distribution is currently 4.8% Bitfury and 17.5% Antpool.  BITMAIN owns other pools as well.
Pointing out the evil of one company does not negate the evil of another.  Perhaps you should address the claims directly instead of trying to direct the attention to another pool.

Furthermore, BITMAIN has far more power and influence than Bitfury does.

What claims?

[Iranus]

Bitcoin hashrate distribution is currently 4.8% Bitfury and 17.5% Antpool.  BITMAIN owns other pools as well.
Pointing out the evil of one company does not negate the evil of another.  Perhaps you should address the claims directly instead of trying to direct the attention to another pool.

Furthermore, BITMAIN has far more power and influence than Bitfury does.

What claims?

I'm referring to any argument against what BITMAIN does.  You clearly recognise that these arguments exist since the title of your thread is "and they say Bitmain is the miner we should be worried about..."

My point is that you're starting a thread to deflect arguments onto another pool.

It would make logical sense if you'd started a thread saying "Bitfury has done/said X", but instead you've started a thread saying "look, BITMAIN isn't bad now! We have another mining pool to insult!"

[ImHash]

Who is bitfury whatsoever? we know nothing about them other than their obvious mining of their own transactions, bitfury is not threatening to split the blockchain intentionally. bitfury wants segwit and when it's activated they will continue mining on it but bitmain has said that they will not switch and will fork to BU and will start mining something else entirely, what is 72 hours mining anyways? I'd like to see them trying to switch from main chain and point all their hash power towards something other than bitcoin.

[Itty Bitty]

You know, in this era of bitcoin that i doubt Satoshi fully foresaw, if there are developers who you think should be leading the bitcoin maintenance / improvements effort, and you're not going to pay them (or tip them) for their enormous volunteer efforts, well it looks like the least you can do (as a group) is provide a few percent of network hashing rate, so there is something available to support them in time of need. Far far far from what Satoshi imagined, i am sure, but that is the brutal reality of 2017 bitcoin - the need for developer support mining.

[jonald_fyookball]

Bitcoin hashrate distribution is currently 4.8% Bitfury and 17.5% Antpool.  BITMAIN owns other pools as well.
Pointing out the evil of one company does not negate the evil of another.  Perhaps you should address the claims directly instead of trying to direct the attention to another pool.

Furthermore, BITMAIN has far more power and influence than Bitfury does.

What claims?

I'm referring to any argument against what BITMAIN does.  You clearly recognise that these arguments exist since the title of your thread is "and they say Bitmain is the miner we should be worried about..."

My point is that you're starting a thread to deflect arguments onto another pool.

It would make logical sense if you'd started a thread saying "Bitfury has done/said X", but instead you've started a thread saying "look, BITMAIN isn't bad now! We have another mining pool to insult!"

to be honest i think all the asicboost/antbleed stuff is a distraction from the scaling debate and not that important even if they are doing something (like using covert asictboost) which there is no proof of anyway.

[franky1]

bitfury part of the BScoin cartel. old news

...

as for paying for development.
it was said long ago that BOUNTIES should be made.
if someone wants a feature, they BIP it and the bip creates a bitcoin address and funds collect from the community (crowdsource) to cover costs.

that way if the community want something they pay for it. if its not wanted it obviously doesnt get funded.

then the devs start to follow the direction the money flows.

however the Devs decided not to bitcoin crowdfund the developers. but instead fiat VC fund the developers.. and then follow the direction the fiat money flows.. which is in a different direction than bitcoins ethos