Thought experiment based on Avalon funding rumor

[Loredo]

Pretend, for a moment, that the announcement of an over-funding equity investment in a company with incontrovertible ability to produce an ASIC bitcoin hasher had been true.  Not that it were Avalon - just any one entity, maybe even an unknown, new entry.

Say that there were no announcement, yet, of what their intentions were.  Could be grabbing and holding 35% of the network continuously, could be buy-in participation plans, could be retail mining equipment available for order.

If you were holding a refundable pre-order in KnC, bitfury, or whomever, this morning, what would you be thinking of doing right now?  Anything?

[1715425845]

1715425845

[Bitcoinorama]

Man this risk has always been omnipresent and until we get as many devices into the wild protecting our network it remains.

Yifu said this at Bitcoin 2013.

This was the irony in the story of him selling out to a private equity firm brokered by an ex-Lehaman bond seller who was supposedly a senior adviser to the UK government during the most unethical period of financial fraud in history.

Further irony being Lehman's collapse and government compliance in wealth transfer and liquidating the value of currency leading to Bitcoin's conception.

But yes, the risk still exists until Bitfury, KnC and others start shipping devices and spreading that network fair, far and wide. To their credit that is what Bitfury, KnC, Butterfly Labs and presumably Avalon have been trying to do.

Yes including BFL...

[Loredo]

Man this risk has always been omnipresent and until we get as many devices into the wild protecting our network it remains.

Sure we know the risk is there.  That's not what I'm wondering about. 

What I'm wondering about is if people would hold on to their original strategy and see their orders through, or respond to the dilution risk right away, which, de facto, means "leave bitcoin behind."

My opinion?  Many, if not most, would hold.  Not because they're stupid, but because they want to mine.  The same reason people will hold on to their BFL orders until they ship or BFL fails. 

[Bitcoinorama]

Man this risk has always been omnipresent and until we get as many devices into the wild protecting our network it remains.

Sure we know the risk is there.  That's not what I'm wondering about.  

What I'm wondering about is if people would hold on to their original strategy and see their orders through, or respond to the dilution risk right away, which, de facto, means "leave bitcoin behind."

My opinion?  Many, if not most, would hold.  Not because they're stupid, but because they want to mine.  The same reason people will hold on to their BFL orders until they ship or BFL fails.  

I've been involved with work that people enjoy and build a community round before.

People do things because they enjoy them. People do things for money.

If the money moves away, people still continue doing what they enjoy.

Bitcoin is a movement, sure there is greed trying to earn a quick buck.

In essence as much as media and delays have meant more people getting on board.

Delays and skepticism have actually helped.

It shakes out those looking to turn a quick profit.

If the greed succeeds, the love will die and people will stop supporting the movement and turn to another...

Greed will be short lived, unless it gets that quick buck.

Integrity depends on the company you back, and how they treat you...

[HeRetiK]

I had a lot of mixed feelings when reading the rumors, but never did I think about giving up on mining or cancelling my preorders.

Firstly, because I want to get my hand on these sexy pieces of hardware. There's also something oddly fascinating / fun about mining that I can't quite put my finger on.

Secondly, I feel a weird sense of... patriotism? To hash and protect...

[Ytterbium]

If KnC delivers in Sept/Oct, we should see a little bit of time where they're still able to make money, and hopefully pay for themselves.

[firefop]

Ok, so you have a point. This sort of thing could be the biggest danger to bitcoin since ASICMiner (yes, a large percentage of hashing hardware available to be seized by chinese govt is a bad idea).

Eventually I'd expect it to happen, no matter how entrenched, there's always a risk that bad actors come into the scene with more money than god and try to destroy it.

[johnyj]

Ok, so you have a point. This sort of thing could be the biggest danger to bitcoin since ASICMiner (yes, a large percentage of hashing hardware available to be seized by chinese govt is a bad idea).

Eventually I'd expect it to happen, no matter how entrenched, there's always a risk that bad actors come into the scene with more money than god and try to destroy it.

Only in a fiat money system you can use printed money to destroy things, more money will just make bitcoin stronger since it is by design against any common wisdom in today's financial system

[Bitcoinorama]

Ok, so you have a point. This sort of thing could be the biggest danger to bitcoin since ASICMiner (yes, a large percentage of hashing hardware available to be seized by chinese govt is a bad idea).

Eventually I'd expect it to happen, no matter how entrenched, there's always a risk that bad actors come into the scene with more money than god and try to destroy it.

Only in a fiat money system you can use printed money to destroy things, more money will just make bitcoin stronger since it is by design against any common wisdom in today's financial system

Guy comes in bringing wealthy friends and treating them to preferential rates whilst the peasants pay through the nose for overpriced delayed goods. Centralisation involves control and those at the top doing better than everyone else, generally for no other reason than sociopathic lack of empathy.