[2021-01-12] The Era of Government-Friendly Bitcoin Miners Is Here

[Karartma1]

Are there so much hash rate in North America? I don't know. However, that 8% you're telling is already more than I expected.

keep in mind, that's just the DCMNA's claim. it's not publicly verifiable at all. they have an interest in creating the perception that they are a force to be reckoned with, especially considering the general expectation of future consolidation in the mining industry, and also the expectation of growth in north america.

That's all the hash rate they will have when bitmain finishes delivering all the gear and it is a confirmed order from bitmain side also:
https://blog.bitmain.com/en/marathon-patent-group-purchases-additional-70000-19-series-miners-from-bitmain/
They right now have about 33k, which's a bit lower than 3% of the global hashrate, with the additional gear assuming no hash rate increase they will indeed manage to get close to some 8%, enough to mine a block every two hours, although not quite enough to cause a real disturbance (on today's numbers)  things could go ugly pretty soon if we hit another transaction spike.

Would be interesting to research whether and if these companies have had any form of a public grant or something to pay for that huge contract they signed with bitmain; that would tell a lot of the game they are playing.

[1714684642]

1714684642

[1714684642]

1714684642

[1714684642]

1714684642

[1714684642]

1714684642

[1714684642]

1714684642

[stompix]

Would be interesting to research whether and if these companies have had any form of a public grant or something to pay for that huge contract they signed with bitmain; that would tell a lot of the game they are playing.

Direct offerings:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/marathon-patent-group-announces-closing-215700823.html
And money has come from everywhere, including from Vanguard and Fidelity.
It's a Nasdaq listed company, no point in trying to dig some conspiracy theory, they've smelled a niche, and they are betting their business on it.
People pay a premium for "clean" fresh coins, why wouldn't they pay more for their transactions to be "certified' or whatever term they will be using, in a world that has a habit of trying to show you it defies logic every second it wouldn't amaze me to hear they are already negotiating with some exchanges.

[hv_]

It's not 'censorship resistant' - or 'decentralized'  -  not at all, but getting sold as such

[DooMAD]

Two North American mining companies are launching a pool that pledges "to only process transactions that comply with American laws."

Is anyone else thinking that this pledge might be a little hollow and they're just trying to avoid the usual FUD about how "Bitcoin is used by criminals".  They talk a big game about only processing certain transactions, but I'd bet in practice they aren't looking that closely.  And, as already mentioned by odolvlobo, they'd never know for certain even if they were genuinely attempting to be vigilant.  People are cunning and will find ways around it anyway.

Maybe presenting the facade of compliance is the only way they could get a green light from the bureaucrats?

[Carlton Banks]

Maybe presenting the facade of compliance is the only way they could get a green light from the bureaucrats?

didn't consider that possibility, despite corruption being the pivot in my argument. How could these professional mouthpieces possibly know their regulations are even being applied? "look your holiness, the little green tick next to the amount means only nice Americans are paying this money to other nice Americans"

[dansus021]

i mean is that really possible for miner to confirm only good transaction only

[Karartma1]

Would be interesting to research whether and if these companies have had any form of a public grant or something to pay for that huge contract they signed with bitmain; that would tell a lot of the game they are playing.

Direct offerings:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/marathon-patent-group-announces-closing-215700823.html
And money has come from everywhere, including from Vanguard and Fidelity.
It's a Nasdaq listed company, no point in trying to dig some conspiracy theory, they've smelled a niche, and they are betting their business on it.
People pay a premium for "clean" fresh coins, why wouldn't they pay more for their transactions to be "certified' or whatever term they will be using, in a world that has a habit of trying to show you it defies logic every second it wouldn't amaze me to hear they are already negotiating with some exchanges.

Thank you stompix, I was just being curious about it, no conspiracy intended. Maybe for us, bitcoiners, it would be just crazy to think that these entities would like to pay a premium for clean coins from the coinbase but so be it. Eventually, the clean coins will start circulating and be tainted anyway.

[wbich]

And what is the mechanism for checking transactions for legality? How are they going to determine that?

[DooMAD]

And what is the mechanism for checking transactions for legality? How are they going to determine that?

They seem to be keeping that a closely guarded secret.  We're all wondering the same thing.  Which is why I'm thinking it might just be a smokescreen to appease the suits.  If no one can figure out how they're doing it, they might not actually be doing it at all.

Or maybe it's a token gesture like "we maintain a blacklist of addresses we won't process transactions for", which is almost completely ineffective when people can just generate a new address for each transaction.

 

[wbich]

And what is the mechanism for checking transactions for legality? How are they going to determine that?

They seem to be keeping that a closely guarded secret.  We're all wondering the same thing.  Which is why I'm thinking it might just be a smokescreen to appease the suits.  If no one can figure out how they're doing it, they might not actually be doing it at all.

Or maybe it's a token gesture like "we maintain a blacklist of addresses we won't process transactions for", which is almost completely ineffective when people can just generate a new address for each transaction.

 

Got it, thanks!!! For some reason I thought it was unrealistic, I wonder how the oversight agencies would feel about such "fraud".