|
MikeyVeez (OP)
|
 |
November 29, 2013, 05:36:47 PM
Last edit: December 07, 2013, 10:09:18 PM by MikeyVeez |
|
Well as difficulty increases and Th's upon Th's is required to mine anything profitable, bitcoin easily becomes centralized as no average person can even run these systems without upgrading their electrical wiring.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
LiteCoinGuy
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1148
Merit: 1010
In Satoshi I Trust
|
 |
November 29, 2013, 05:45:16 PM |
|
because only one company in the world can make a professional mining-rig?  |
|
|
|
|
amincd
|
|
November 29, 2013, 05:46:06 PM |
|
There is no minimum amount of hashes that one needs to produce to contribute to Bitcoin mining. It's totally parallelizable, meaning the network hashrate could be the sum of a billion people each producing 1 billionth of the network hashrate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MikeyVeez (OP)
|
|
November 29, 2013, 05:51:15 PM |
|
There is no minimum amount of hashes that one needs to produce to contribute to Bitcoin mining. It's totally parallelizable.
Nobody is going to run a machine for a few cents or dollars, or run at a lose of electricity cost. Even if they run a small unit just to sort the network, their 10gh is nothing compared to THs and PHs large miners will deploy so end of the day, your small miner becomes smaller and smaller share of the network. |
|
|
|
Lauda
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965
Terminated.
|
|
November 29, 2013, 05:56:39 PM |
|
There is no minimum amount of hashes that one needs to produce to contribute to Bitcoin mining. It's totally parallelizable.
Nobody is going to run a machine for a few cents or dollars, or run at a lose of electricity cost. Even if they run a small unit just to sort the network, their 10gh is nothing compared to THs and PHs large miners will deploy so end of the day, your small miner becomes smaller and smaller share of the network. I know for a fact that there are individuals who are running miners just to secure the network, some with high hashes. |
"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks" 😼 Bitcoin Core ( onion) |
|
|
|
Twerka
|
|
November 29, 2013, 08:48:14 PM |
|
NSA and the NASA should have supercomputers.... if the US goverments supports the coin it's because we are all entering into a trap of magic mirrors.
|
The worst enemy of Bitcoin is Mt.Gox exchange.
|
|
|
Lauda
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965
Terminated.
|
|
November 29, 2013, 08:50:45 PM |
|
NSA and the NASA should have supercomputers.... if the US goverments supports the coin it's because we are all entering into a trap of magic mirrors.
You do realize that our current hashrate is bigger than what the TOP 500 supercomputers can produce, right? |
"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks" 😼 Bitcoin Core ( onion) |
|
|
|
rmines
|
|
November 29, 2013, 08:51:44 PM |
|
+1 So far for the accusations that decentralization is a myth  |
|
|
|
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
|
|
November 29, 2013, 08:52:19 PM |
|
Nobody is going to run a machine for a few cents or dollars, or run at a lose of electricity cost. Mining is a embaressingly parallel problem. If a 1 TH/s rig is operating at a loss then a 1,000 TH/s rig (which has 1,000 the output and use 1,000 the power) would also be operating at a loss. Even if they run a small unit just to sort the network, their 10gh is nothing compared to THs and PHs large miners will deploy so end of the day, your small miner becomes smaller and smaller share of the network. Large miners aren't going to deploy more than it makes economic sense. Still your claim was nobody could afford the electrical upgrade so why then jump to something silly like 10 GH/s. Even in the US a "normal" outlet is 15A @ 120V. With a 20% derate for continual loads that means a safe load of 1440W. With currency efficiency being 0.8 J/GH we are talking pretty close to 2TH/s. In countries which use 240V it is more like double that. Now someday 2 TH/s (or 4 TH/s) might not be a lot however a million miners with 2TH/s (or 4 Th/s) each is still a lot of hashing power. Will mining be a get rich quick scheme? No. Then again Bitcoin doesn't need it to be. |
|
|
|
|
|
pening
|
|
November 29, 2013, 10:30:31 PM |
|
I know for a fact that there are individuals who are running miners just to secure the network, some with high hashes. So, they'll likely be the centralised miners...? |
|
|
|
|
Lauda
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965
Terminated.
|
|
November 29, 2013, 10:33:39 PM |
|
I know for a fact that there are individuals who are running miners just to secure the network, some with high hashes. So, they'll likely be the centralised miners...? If I'm running a miner just to secure the network, I will be a centralized miner? Huh? |
"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks" 😼 Bitcoin Core ( onion) |
|
|
Piper67
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1001
|
|
November 29, 2013, 10:43:30 PM |
|
Nobody is going to run a machine for a few cents or dollars, or run at a lose of electricity cost. Mining is a embaressingly parallel problem. If a 1 TH/s rig is operating at a loss then a 1,000 TH/s rig (which has 1,000 the output and use 1,000 the power) would also be operating at a loss. Even if they run a small unit just to sort the network, their 10gh is nothing compared to THs and PHs large miners will deploy so end of the day, your small miner becomes smaller and smaller share of the network. Large miners aren't going to deploy more than it makes economic sense. Still your claim was nobody could afford the electrical upgrade so why then jump to something silly like 10 GH/s. Even in the US a "normal" outlet is 15A @ 120V. With a 20% derate for continual loads that means a safe load of 1440W. With currency efficiency being 0.8 J/GH we are talking pretty close to 2TH/s. In countries which use 240V it is more like double that. Now someday 2 TH/s (or 4 TH/s) might not be a lot however a million miners with 2TH/s (or 4 Th/s) each is still a lot of hashing power. Will mining be a get rich quick scheme? No. Then again Bitcoin doesn't need it to be. This is the kind of answer that, if I were to see it on Reddit, would make me want to tip. Then again, I suspect Death and Taxes doesn't really need my mBTC  |
|
|
|
|
|
davedx
|
|
November 29, 2013, 11:01:44 PM |
|
Support the co-operatives!
|
|
|
|
|
AnonyMint
|
|
November 30, 2013, 01:08:40 AM
Last edit: November 30, 2013, 04:33:56 AM by AnonyMint |
|
because only one company in the world can make a professional mining-rig? Because only perhaps 3% of the world's population can. Additionally note that funding for mining in Bitcoin dies. Additionally imagine how much easier it is for a government to buy up all the supply of ASICs and/or force the companies (as the NSA has done to the major telecoms and internet companies even preventing them from telling us), versus them trying to buy up enough PCs to compete with all the PCs we already have. We need a PC-only mining altcoin. Support the co-operatives!
That is centralization.
The catch is that by the time if you get said [ASIC] machine the difficulty will be so high that you will be lucky to ever see a roi.
OP please correct your typo on the thread title, "decentralization". |
|
|
|
|
MikeyVeez (OP)
|
|
December 07, 2013, 10:08:33 PM |
|
because only one company in the world can make a professional mining-rig? Because only perhaps 3% of the world's population can. Additionally note that funding for mining in Bitcoin dies. Additionally imagine how much easier it is for a government to buy up all the supply of ASICs and/or force the companies (as the NSA has done to the major telecoms and internet companies even preventing them from telling us), versus them trying to buy up enough PCs to compete with all the PCs we already have. We need a PC-only mining altcoin. Support the co-operatives!
That is centralization.
The catch is that by the time if you get said [ASIC] machine the difficulty will be so high that you will be lucky to ever see a roi.
OP please correct your typo on the thread title, "decentralization". Yep but it's ok peoplr will cry when they buy Bitcoins at $10, 000 a coin. Hence why I am awaiting eMunie its basically hard drive dependant, and solves alot of the other issues massive price swings for one. No this isn't an eMunie thread for all you trolls. |
|
|
|
|
virtualmaster
|
|
December 07, 2013, 11:38:29 PM |
|
They are more stages between centralized and decentralized.
Don't think only in black and white.
|
|
|
|
hiltonizer
Member
Offline
Activity: 104
Merit: 10
|
|
December 08, 2013, 05:07:47 AM |
|
Mining doesn't have to be profitable either for people to continue to do it.
Businesses thriving on the meta bitcoin economy will have incentive to run nodes for the sake of stability. I'm sure Bitpay, the exchanges, even Dice sites have an incentive to run nodes to keep the network secure.
|
DarkCoin: XiZutyRTPTEFQm5aH2de2SCmzfgE6B78uK
Bitcoin: 1P4wYgkKTh3WzHUGqLFaef23bAeM4UV2jB
|
|
|
jackioflap
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 52
Merit: 0
|
|
December 08, 2013, 05:38:42 AM |
|
Should BTC truly be adopted as a currency and not a comodity then people will absolutly run nodes for free. Hell i can collect old crappy pc`s to run nodes with wasting energy. Might not make anything but ill feel good that i help keep bitcoin running. Im greedy as hell but im also broke so i know the value of work that MUST be done regardless of getting paid.
|
|
|
|
|
MoonShadow
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1007
|
|
December 08, 2013, 05:43:22 AM |
|
There is no minimum amount of hashes that one needs to produce to contribute to Bitcoin mining. It's totally parallelizable.
Nobody is going to run a machine for a few cents or dollars, or run at a lose of electricity cost. Even if they run a small unit just to sort the network, their 10gh is nothing compared to THs and PHs large miners will deploy so end of the day, your small miner becomes smaller and smaller share of the network. I'm doing it right now, because I need heat in my basement anyway, and electric service is 7.5 cents per KWH where I live. That's about the same as the cost of propane, which is my other choice. So why not, since I have the rig? |
"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."
- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
|
|
|
|
MikeyVeez (OP)
|
|
December 08, 2013, 10:19:38 AM |
|
There is no minimum amount of hashes that one needs to produce to contribute to Bitcoin mining. It's totally parallelizable.
Nobody is going to run a machine for a few cents or dollars, or run at a lose of electricity cost. Even if they run a small unit just to sort the network, their 10gh is nothing compared to THs and PHs large miners will deploy so end of the day, your small miner becomes smaller and smaller share of the network. I'm doing it right now, because I need heat in my basement anyway, and electric service is 7.5 cents per KWH where I live. That's about the same as the cost of propane, which is my other choice. So why not, since I have the rig? Can't compare us to the rest of the population, who will never run a miner. Secondly you running that 1 rig doesnt matter. As the network grows your share of the network decreases for people to keep it decentralized they need to keep adding hash as the network grows. The big guys will keep getting bigger while the small will get smaller. |
|
|
|
|
