rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;)

[conspirosphere.tk]

You are talking non-sense.  If there is some kind of explanation regarding the set up of a society without government, then surely that can be explained rather than asserting that you have some obscure knowledge that solves everything, but such knowledge is at too high of a level to take the time to explain. 

The big secret is this:
"Never was there a government that was not composed of liars, malefactors and thieves." - Marcus Tullius Cicero

Now feel free to keep believing in the great gifts from your democratically representative and economically interventionist state, but my advice is to leave a way out to who wants to opt out of it. Or large-scale violence will start at some point as usual.

[1714468845]

1714468845

[1714468845]

1714468845

[1714468845]

1714468845

[1714468845]

1714468845

[1714468845]

1714468845

[macsga]

You are talking non-sense.  If there is some kind of explanation regarding the set up of a society without government, then surely that can be explained rather than asserting that you have some obscure knowledge that solves everything, but such knowledge is at too high of a level to take the time to explain. 

The big secret is this:
"Never was there a government that was not composed of liars, malefactors and thieves." - Marcus Tullius Cicero

Now feel free to keep believing in the great gifts from your democratically representative and economically interventionist state, but my advice is to leave a way out to who wants to opt out of it. Or large-scale violence will start at some point as usual.

^^^THIS!

Plus the fact that the current impostors we "vote" for politicians were always been into the dirt and thus they're blackmailable. At least where I live there's no elected politician that he's/she's not "controllable". There's simply no democracy when somebody "has you" and wants something from you. You will vote for it anyway. Whoever controls the governments nowadays is ANYTHING but democratic. It's a Mafia clan which is baptised "Democratic" for misleading the crowds.

[silverfuture]

You are talking non-sense.  If there is some kind of explanation regarding the set up of a society without government, then surely that can be explained rather than asserting that you have some obscure knowledge that solves everything, but such knowledge is at too high of a level to take the time to explain. 

The big secret is this:
"Never was there a government that was not composed of liars, malefactors and thieves." - Marcus Tullius Cicero

Now feel free to keep believing in the great gifts from your democratically representative and economically interventionist state, but my advice is to leave a way out to who wants to opt out of it. Or large-scale violence will start at some point as usual.

^^^THIS!

Plus the fact that the current impostors we "vote" for politicians were always been into the dirt and thus they're blackmailable. At least where I live there's no elected politician that he's/she's not "controllable". There's simply no democracy when somebody "has you" and wants something from you. You will vote for it anyway. Whoever controls the governments nowadays is ANYTHING but democratic. It's a Mafia clan which is baptised "Democratic" for misleading the crowds.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2014/10/18/vote-all-you-want-the-secret-government-won-change/jVSkXrENQlu8vNcBfMn9sL/story.html

[JayJuanGee]

You are talking non-sense.  If there is some kind of explanation regarding the set up of a society without government, then surely that can be explained rather than asserting that you have some obscure knowledge that solves everything, but such knowledge is at too high of a level to take the time to explain. 

The big secret is this:
"Never was there a government that was not composed of liars, malefactors and thieves." - Marcus Tullius Cicero

Now feel free to keep believing in the great gifts from your democratically representative and economically interventionist state, but my advice is to leave a way out to who wants to opt out of it. Or large-scale violence will start at some point as usual.

I deny that any burden lies upon me to argue in favor of any government.  Part of my point, in challenging the claims of Rptiella is that he made the claims, more or less, that we can have a world without government and taxes without asserting an alternative vision.  In essence, he asserted, without substantiation, that all the various services of the tax dollars are wasted and we can just do away with such.  The burden is NOT on me to substantiate any claims, b/c I am NOT making claims, the burden, from my viewpoint, is on the person making the claims to substantiate them to some extent or to refrain engaging in such pie in the sky assertions.

Currently, I am of the believe that government is way to intertwined in a lot of ways in the lives of many people, and there would need to be a transition out of government and into some kind of alternative society.  You cannot just throw it all out, as some of these nut job get rid of government claims attempt to assert.

[Biodom]

Japanese propose a "better" bitcoin
http://www.coindesk.com/japanese-scholars-draft-proposal-better-bitcoin/

In my opinion, this is a non-starter, but there is something there I am interested in, which is what would happen if the price of bitcoin goes significantly below the cost of production for most miners.

In my opinion, at $200 per BTC we would probably lose a half or more of the network, and at $100, we would lose ~80%. 15% of the network are home miners, which would be the slowest to turn the equipment off. That said, i maintain that for the bull market to restart we need to at least halve the network size first as happened in late 2011. However, KnC just announced a new 20mw data center, which does not bode well for the immediate future. Only when some of these large scale miners go out of business, bull market will resume.

[JayJuanGee]

You are talking non-sense.  If there is some kind of explanation regarding the set up of a society without government, then surely that can be explained rather than asserting that you have some obscure knowledge that solves everything, but such knowledge is at too high of a level to take the time to explain. 

The big secret is this:
"Never was there a government that was not composed of liars, malefactors and thieves." - Marcus Tullius Cicero

Now feel free to keep believing in the great gifts from your democratically representative and economically interventionist state, but my advice is to leave a way out to who wants to opt out of it. Or large-scale violence will start at some point as usual.

^^^THIS!

Plus the fact that the current impostors we "vote" for politicians were always been into the dirt and thus they're blackmailable. At least where I live there's no elected politician that he's/she's not "controllable". There's simply no democracy when somebody "has you" and wants something from you. You will vote for it anyway. Whoever controls the governments nowadays is ANYTHING but democratic. It's a Mafia clan which is baptised "Democratic" for misleading the crowds.

No doubt that there are a lot of problems with government including the fact that there is too much control of government by big money rather than by people.  If there are ways to reform and to get the input of the people back into the government and to get the money out, then that would be great.  I have my doubts about whether it is practical and/or feasible to attempt any kind of total abolition of government, but there may be several ways to attempt to get money out of politics.

[NotLambchop]

...what would happen if the price of bitcoin goes significantly below the cost of production for most miners...

...
Woah! That's completely fcked up man. If mining isn't that profitable anymore and this here happens to you? Just, damn.

Funkiest electrical fire I've ever seen.  Those Spondoolies boxen must be stuffed with accelerants...

[conspirosphere.tk]

If there are ways to reform and to get the input of the people back into the government and to get the money out, then that would be great.

It would be like reforming flies to not seek sh*t. Because everyone wants free sh*t paid by someone else -and can't never get enough. So the choice is between individual freedom and serfdom. Everything else is a scam.

[NotLambchop]

...So the choice is between individual freedom and serfdom. Everything else is a scam.

Freedom is the opiate of the masses.



  ~Your Beneficent Reptilian Overlords.

[molecular]

Japanese propose a "better" bitcoin
http://www.coindesk.com/japanese-scholars-draft-proposal-better-bitcoin/

In my opinion, this is a non-starter, but there is something there I am interested in, which is what would happen if the price of bitcoin goes significantly below the cost of production for most miners.

This wont happen. As opposed to for example with gold mining, with bitcoin mining, the cost of production decreases with price (indirectly by: price decrease -> some miners shut down -> difficulty decrease -> production cost decrease), because production is kept constant artificially, no matter how hard miners dig.

So unless "most miners" are irrational and mine at a loss, what you say can't happen.

That said, i maintain that for the bull market to restart we need to at least halve the network size first as happened in late 2011.

What logic are you basing that on? That less fresh fiat needs to be input just to pay for mining?

What do you mean by "size of network"? Total operating cost of mining? Aggregate hashrate?

[Biodom]

Japanese propose a "better" bitcoin
http://www.coindesk.com/japanese-scholars-draft-proposal-better-bitcoin/

In my opinion, this is a non-starter, but there is something there I am interested in, which is what would happen if the price of bitcoin goes significantly below the cost of production for most miners.

This wont happen. As opposed to for example with gold mining, with bitcoin mining, the cost of production decreases with price (indirectly by: price decrease -> some miners shut down -> difficulty decrease -> production cost decrease), because production is kept constant artificially, no matter how hard miners dig.

So unless "most miners" are irrational and mine at a loss, what you say can't happen.

You are talking about long term equilibrium, but I am talking about short term (1-2 mo) after price dip. Network hashing adjustment is NOT automatic and depends on each miner decision. Price can move faster than network adjusment, but network would eventually adjust-this i agree with.

That said, i maintain that for the bull market to restart we need to at least halve the network size first as happened in late 2011.

What logic are you basing that on? That less fresh fiat needs to be input just to pay for mining?

What do you mean by "size of network"? Total operating cost of mining? Aggregate hashrate?

I am making a historical comparison with 2011 situation when bull market resumed ONLY after the network hashing rate declined ~50%-you can check the charts-they are uncanny.
By the size of network i mean the total hashing rate.
Right now low bitcoin price causes larger and larger bitcoin numbers to be dumped by miners to compensate for their costs. This is a vicious cycle that, in my opinion, will be broken only when higher cost producers are eliminated from mining OR there is a sudden increase in buying with the latter being unlikely.

[JayJuanGee]

If there are ways to reform and to get the input of the people back into the government and to get the money out, then that would be great.

It would be like reforming flies to not seek sh*t. Because everyone wants free sh*t paid by someone else -and can't never get enough. So the choice is between individual freedom and serfdom. Everything else is a scam.

your being too extreme and over generalizing... show me a complex society without some community entities (otherwise known as government). 

If the planet only had less than .5 billion people, then maybe we could each be sufficiently independent to NOT have community entities.. but I do NOT see such individual freedom with more than 7 billion peeps... therefore, some kinds of government and community establishments seem to be necessary..   In other words, it does NOT seem possible to throw out all of the bathwater b/c there happens to be a baby in there... 

[JorgeStolfi]

Those Spondoolies boxen must be stuffed with accelerants...

Even plastics that are "non-flammable", like PVC and circuit boards, will release flammable gases when thrown into a fire.  Ditto for painted metal. Maybe the fire started in some flammabe material (such as the roof insulation) but was then sustained and amplified by those gases.

[NotLambchop]

Those Spondoolies boxen must be stuffed with accelerants...

Even plastics that are "non-flammable", like PVC and circuit boards, will release flammable gases when thrown into a fire.  Ditto for painted metal. Maybe the fire started in some flammabe material (such as the roof insulation) but was then sustained and amplified by those gases.

Not sure about the Wild East, but western insulation is mostly non flammable.   Sure, the forced air can do wonders when it comes to sustaining fires, but other than cable insulation (which sorta burns) this was an empty building with concrete floors, metal racks, and SP boxen (there's a pre-fire pic somewhere on this forum). 
Having a hard time imagining how a staffed facility could go up like that.

/Tips "911 was government jews and thermite" hat

[Erdogan]

Japanese propose a "better" bitcoin
http://www.coindesk.com/japanese-scholars-draft-proposal-better-bitcoin/

In my opinion, this is a non-starter, but there is something there I am interested in, which is what would happen if the price of bitcoin goes significantly below the cost of production for most miners.

This wont happen. As opposed to for example with gold mining, with bitcoin mining, the cost of production decreases with price (indirectly by: price decrease -> some miners shut down -> difficulty decrease -> production cost decrease), because production is kept constant artificially, no matter how hard miners dig.

So unless "most miners" are irrational and mine at a loss, what you say can't happen.

You are talking about long term equilibrium, but I am talking about short term (1-2 mo) after price dip. Network hashing adjustment is NOT automatic and depends on each miner decision. Price can move faster than network adjusment, but network would eventually adjust-this i agree with.

That said, i maintain that for the bull market to restart we need to at least halve the network size first as happened in late 2011.

What logic are you basing that on? That less fresh fiat needs to be input just to pay for mining?

What do you mean by "size of network"? Total operating cost of mining? Aggregate hashrate?

I am making a historical comparison with 2011 situation when bull market resumed ONLY after the network hashing rate declined ~50%-you can check the charts-they are uncanny.
By the size of network i mean the total hashing rate.
Right now low bitcoin price causes larger and larger bitcoin numbers to be dumped by miners to compensate for their costs. This is a vicious cycle that, in my opinion, will be broken only when higher cost producers are eliminated from mining OR there is a sudden increase in buying with the latter being unlikely.

It's a govcoin. It could be done, and they should do it, because it would enable quick international transactions and anonymity. But they won't, because they would not give away anonymity. If they do, it won't succeed, because they would expand the supply not to stabilize prices, but to suck value out of the system. And if they could keep their hands off, it could only exist in the interim, because bitcoin.

[JorgeStolfi]

I am making a historical comparison with 2011 situation when bull market resumed ONLY after the network hashing rate declined ~50%-you can check the charts-they are uncanny.

Price obviously affects total hashpower, but I cannot see how hashpower could influence price.   The number of new coins mined per day is pretty much independent of hashpower (except momentarily, between difficulty adjustments).  While miners desperately wish the BTC price to go up, they have no means to influence it.

My reading of what happened in 2011 is: a new large market (drug users? Thailand?) opened in Apr/2011, and, as it adopted bitcoin, the demand caused the 2011 bubble, pushing the price from ~0.6$ to ~14$ in Jul/2011.  But that market then closed (Thailand banned bitcoin?), and its members gradually sold its coins; so that the price started to drop towards the pre-bubble level (~0.6$).  However, in Nov/2011 -- when the price was still at ~2.2$, or +1.6$ above the floor, but still dropping -- another market opened, and its demand bumped the price to ~6.6$ (a +4.5$ increase).  Meanwhile, the first market continued to shrink; by the end of Feb/2012 its demand had vanished, eliminating the remaining +1.6$ overprice and bringing the price down to 5.0$.  Thus the the second market, alone, was responsible for the overall increase from ~0.6$ in Apr/2011 to ~5.0$ in Mar/2012.

The situation now seems to be indeed similar to that of Nov/2011. The Chinese speculators who were responsible for the Nov/2013 bubble seem to be losing interest and selling their coins, and this loss of demand is driving the price down to the pre-bubble level (~140$).  However, in order to get a recovery similar to that of Nov/2011, one would need a similar cause -- namely, another new market of sufficient size.

[molecular]

Japanese propose a "better" bitcoin
http://www.coindesk.com/japanese-scholars-draft-proposal-better-bitcoin/

In my opinion, this is a non-starter, but there is something there I am interested in, which is what would happen if the price of bitcoin goes significantly below the cost of production for most miners.

This wont happen. As opposed to for example with gold mining, with bitcoin mining, the cost of production decreases with price (indirectly by: price decrease -> some miners shut down -> difficulty decrease -> production cost decrease), because production is kept constant artificially, no matter how hard miners dig.

So unless "most miners" are irrational and mine at a loss, what you say can't happen.

You are talking about long term equilibrium, but I am talking about short term (1-2 mo) after price dip. Network hashing adjustment is NOT automatic and depends on each miner decision. Price can move faster than network adjusment, but network would eventually adjust-this i agree with.

That said, i maintain that for the bull market to restart we need to at least halve the network size first as happened in late 2011.

What logic are you basing that on? That less fresh fiat needs to be input just to pay for mining?

What do you mean by "size of network"? Total operating cost of mining? Aggregate hashrate?

I am making a historical comparison with 2011 situation when bull market resumed ONLY after the network hashing rate declined ~50%-you can check the charts-they are uncanny.
By the size of network i mean the total hashing rate.
Right now low bitcoin price causes larger and larger bitcoin numbers to be dumped by miners to compensate for their costs. This is a vicious cycle that, in my opinion, will be broken only when higher cost producers are eliminated from mining OR there is a sudden increase in buying with the latter being unlikely.

yes, I agree. I think it makes sense to look at the percentage of mined coins being sold by miners (I have no idea what that currently is.. maybe 50%?). It cannot reach >100%, so the vicious cycle is broken at that point. I recently guesstimated at what price miners would have to sell 100% of their coins to cover operating cost (captial investment excluded). Came out to very roughly $100. If anyone has better numbers, I'd be interested to see them.

[Biodom]

I am making a historical comparison with 2011 situation when bull market resumed ONLY after the network hashing rate declined ~50%-you can check the charts-they are uncanny.

I cannot see how hashpower could influence price.  

As OP had also posted, only indirectly, of course. High hash power for higher cost producers (miners) causes them to liquidate larger and larger % of their bitcoin, shifting the price equilibrium toward lower BTC cost-in a vicious cycle.

yes, I agree. I think it makes sense to look at the percentage of mined coins being sold by miners (I have no idea what that currently is.. maybe 50%?). It cannot reach >100%, so the vicious cycle is broken at that point. I recently guesstimated at what price miners would have to sell 100% of their coins to cover operating cost (captial investment excluded). Came out to very roughly $100. If anyone has better numbers, I'd be interested to see them.

It is difficult to calculate, but from the personal experience, either hosting or home based cost ~10-14c/kwh in US, which makes costs around ~$135-150/BTC for most efficient hosted machines and ~$110-125 for home based miners, so your number is essentially correct. This does not take into consideration the cost of mining equipment, which is unrealistic, of course. In a hosting situation, i have to either sell ~50% of mined BTC or keep BTC and cover costs out of pocket. Every increase in difficulty and stagnating or decreasing price will skew this more and more toward 100%. The option of not selling is not available in most cases for large organizations, although bitfury claimed that they do not currently sell mined BTC because the price is "too low".

[bitebits]

yes, I agree. I think it makes sense to look at the percentage of mined coins being sold by miners (I have no idea what that currently is.. maybe 50%?). It cannot reach >100%, so the vicious cycle is broken at that point. I recently guesstimated at what price miners would have to sell 100% of their coins to cover operating cost (captial investment excluded). Came out to very roughly $100. If anyone has better numbers, I'd be interested to see them.

Have you read the DiitalBTC Q3 report?
http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20141020/pdf/42t0mqrygyzd74.pdf

However, because of investments in mining equipment and the fact that the firm is holding a significant portion of its mined bitcoin, the company posted an operating loss of $261,000.

Despite the figures, the company is downplaying the effect of short-term price fluctuations on its business and still maintains its performance is "robust".

Unlike most bitcoin companies, Digital CC Limited is a public company, trading on the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) as 'digitalBTC'. This makes it is the only major mining operation with an obligation to provide such information, giving outsiders a rare glimpse into the inner working of a bitcoin mining company.

[brg444]

Right now low bitcoin price causes larger and larger bitcoin numbers to be dumped by miners to compensate for their costs. This is a vicious cycle that, in my opinion, will be broken only when higher cost producers are eliminated from mining OR there is a sudden increase in buying with the latter being unlikely.

Miners dumping all dumping a majority of their coin is a myth that I have repeatedly proven to be wrong.