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

[squatter]

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

Does anyone think there is actually a market for this -- mining pools that ignore Bitcoin's fee incentives and only process "clean" transactions?

Some excerpts from the Vice article:

Two of the largest Bitcoin mining companies in North America, Marathon Patent Inc. and DMG Blockchain Solutions Inc., recently joined forces to create the Digital Currency Miners of North America (DCMNA) nonprofit trade group, the first North American mining pool with a legal entity. Together, they're pledging to only process transactions that comply with American laws.

Although there’s no clear connection between custodial rules and the Bitcoin mining industry, DCMNA isn’t taking any chances. The DCMNA is pioneering a technique it calls “clean mining,” meaning it selects which transactions to process based on wallet information instead of the most lucrative fee options. In other words, they're promising to only mine transactions that the government approves of, even if it means revenue takes a hit.

“We can tell regulators our mining pools are not doing business with child traffickers, terrorists, or miners in Iran,” Okamoto said. “We’ll lose about 0.35% of our potential business. We think that’s a small price to pay for being able to say we are the good guys, according to the U.S. Treasury... if I point my business toward Chinese pools, they might be doing business with those bad actors.”

Combined, DCMNA's two current members claim to make up almost 8 percent of the entire Bitcoin network’s hashrate. That's nothing to sniff at, and they're looking to swell their ranks with more miners willing to only process U.S. government-friendly transactions.

[1714740444]

1714740444

[1714740444]

1714740444

[1714740444]

1714740444

[1714740444]

1714740444

[cr1776]

Taproot and other privacy enhancements can't come soon enough to avoid this concept of tainted bitcoins. By their "logic" banks should have detectors to check cash for coke in order to not accept it for deposit. (They should sanitize it too.)


* see e.g. 
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-is-exactly-how-often-cocaine-and-feces-show-up-on-your-dollar-bills-2017-07-11

[hv_]

Mining must be compliant / regulated anyway. It is the physical bridge - so the need electricity and infrastructure all day + pay with fiat. No way they can dodge and do evil & stay

[NeuroticFish]

It's an interesting direction. Not nice, however interesting.
But as long as whoever has miners can choose to go to that pool or the others, most would not care to join there if there's no financial incentive (lower fees than the others).
Also I expect some miners think that the process of picking the clean transactions my affect the pool speed and make them lose a block now and then.

At least for now I think that it won't get traction, at least not for this marketing alone.

[acquafredda]

Taproot and other privacy enhancements can't come soon enough to avoid this concept of tainted bitcoins. By their "logic" banks should have detectors to check cash for coke in order to not accept it for deposit. (They should sanitize it too.)


* see e.g. 
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-is-exactly-how-often-cocaine-and-feces-show-up-on-your-dollar-bills-2017-07-11

*They would also need to clean up rivers and fresh waters considering the amount of leftover from drug abuse.
Let them mine at a loss eventually. Do you remember this news? We saw it already
https://cryptobriefing.com/new-bitcoin-mining-pool-says-it-will-censor-btc-transactions/

[squatter]

It's an interesting direction. Not nice, however interesting.
But as long as whoever has miners can choose to go to that pool or the others, most would not care to join there if there's no financial incentive (lower fees than the others).

They're pitching it as a way to avoid regulatory penalties and compliance costs down the road: Lose a little fee income up front, save on legal costs on the back end. And become a "good actor" in the eyes of the US government in an environment where regulatory actions are looming.

It certainly doesn't appeal to me, but to large corporate mining companies in North America? I wonder. It does bother me that these guys already supposedly control 8% of the hash rate. I really hope they crash and burn.

[NeuroticFish]

It certainly doesn't appeal to me, but to large corporate mining companies in North America? I wonder. It does bother me that these guys already supposedly control 8% of the hash rate. I really hope they crash and burn.

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.

I think that (unfortunately) tainted coins will have less pools at hand which at some point will start to translate at least into higher fees.
Not a great future, but yeah... Bitcoin was never great for illegal stuff.

What bothers me the most (too) is that they are starting an unwanted trend of discretionary picking of transactions. They say they'll filter out what they consider illegal, and normally that would not bother me (drug dealers and crooked politicians should burn in hell) but it's up to .. whom to decide which is illegal? Are they also the court and the judge in all this? That's not normal. That leads the way to filter out tomorrow coins from whatever exchange that doesn't join an union, or from China because.. China, then ... then ... then ...

[cr1776]

This makes me think of this kind of thing - countries that don't seem to trust their citizens and have rulers who want to control, not let people be free, even more so with the incoming US administration.  Talk about bad company for the USA!

Censorship is bad for everyone, including their business.

https://help.sideshift.ai/en/articles/2874595-why-am-i-blocked-from-using-sideshift-ai

You are accessing SideShift.ai from a blocked country:
North Korea (DPRK)
United States of America
Iran, Islamic Republic of
Belarus
Cuba
Eritrea
Syria
Residents of these countries may not use SideShift.ai.

[figmentofmyass]

It does bother me that these guys already supposedly control 8% of the hash rate. I really hope they crash and burn.

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.

I think that (unfortunately) tainted coins will have less pools at hand which at some point will start to translate at least into higher fees.

that will be an unfortunate side effect if "clean miners" ever become a big chunk of the network. people in sanctioned countries or those transacting with them, anyone with "higher risk" outputs, etc will have less predictable confirmation and may have to pay higher fees.

What bothers me the most (too) is that they are starting an unwanted trend of discretionary picking of transactions.

censorship, straight up.

[Karartma1]

This makes me think of this kind of thing - countries that don't seem to trust their citizens and have rulers who want to control, not let people be free, even more so with the incoming US administration.  Talk about bad company for the USA!

Censorship is bad for everyone, including their business.

https://help.sideshift.ai/en/articles/2874595-why-am-i-blocked-from-using-sideshift-ai

You are accessing SideShift.ai from a blocked country:
North Korea (DPRK)
United States of America
Iran, Islamic Republic of
Belarus
Cuba
Eritrea
Syria
Residents of these countries may not use SideShift.ai.

You allowed me to think that this story can be easily linked to what's happening to democracy: if even the President of the United States can be silenced by big tech, we the poor people, truly need to fight hard for something like bitcoin to never have to suffer any of these forms of censorship.
We need more nodes, more miners, more people aware of what is unfolding in front of us.

[odolvlobo]

“We can tell regulators our mining pools are not doing business with child traffickers, terrorists, or miners in Iran,” Okamoto said.

That's an exaggeration. They most they can say is that they aren't aware of business with child traffickers, terrorists, or miners in Iran.

[talozhed]

I wonder if it was a voluntary decision or maybe they were forced to?

[buwaytress]

*They would also need to clean up rivers and fresh waters considering the amount of leftover from drug abuse.
Let them mine at a loss eventually. Do you remember this news? We saw it already
https://cryptobriefing.com/new-bitcoin-mining-pool-says-it-will-censor-btc-transactions/

Yeah I remember this one. Thought people would be giving up on chasing Bitcoin taints by now. And does remind me it's been two years or so since we saw random taint sprays (I've actually received some in the past) where people just send dust to tens of thousands of addresses to "taint" them.

Good thing Bitcoin's developmental focus is on privacy now huh?

[cr1776]

This makes me think of this kind of thing - countries that don't seem to trust their citizens and have rulers who want to control, not let people be free, even more so with the incoming US administration.  Talk about bad company for the USA!

Censorship is bad for everyone, including their business.

https://help.sideshift.ai/en/articles/2874595-why-am-i-blocked-from-using-sideshift-ai

You are accessing SideShift.ai from a blocked country:
North Korea (DPRK)
United States of America
Iran, Islamic Republic of
Belarus
Cuba
Eritrea
Syria
Residents of these countries may not use SideShift.ai.

You allowed me to think that this story can be easily linked to what's happening to democracy: if even the President of the United States can be silenced by big tech, we the poor people, truly need to fight hard for something like bitcoin to never have to suffer any of these forms of censorship.
We need more nodes, more miners, more people aware of what is unfolding in front of us.

p2p everything is critical for freedom around the world going forward.  Who decides what is legal or not and where?

As George Washington "[If] freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter."  Without the freedom to use ones money as one sees fit, freedom of speech won't be worth nearly as much.  Censorship resistant money and speech among many other things are exceedingly important.

[Karartma1]

Those words are truly timeless and we desperately need to re-think our lives in those terms.
 We've been lobotomized in recent years, I can't believe the state in which we are now.

I see Bitcoin as our last tool to save some sovereignty and freedom in the future, I see no other hopes. buwaytress you are right, I'm sure many of us are eagerly waiting for those developments to arrive.

[Carlton Banks]

I guess this initiative is asking a fundamental question: how much capital are people willing to allocate to controlling Bitcoin, and how much capital are people willing to allocate to maintain Bitcoin's freedom?

I don't think they have much hope, frankly. As long as the US foreign policy continues to use the SWIFT network to punish it's enemies (and possibly soon it's erstwhile allies), fee-paying transactions will continue to be processed on the Bitcoin network. I can't see the IMF or the BIS making any impact trying to make a deal on this; the balance of power is too biased, their political power is on a downward trajectory anyway, and their enforcement arm (US/EU military) are on thin ice as far as funding is concerned. The lack of major financial crises in the last decade, compounded by the overall systemic rot and 2020's economic malaise, signifies a big (potentially monumental) reduction in the effectiveness of the US/EU military threat.

And I heard all the mining chips are still designed and fabricated in Shezhen anyway. I guess the US could, I dunno, crash their economy a little bit to make their silicon fabrication industry competitive? Oh, and they could build some kind of silicon fabrication industry too, they don't have one to speak of as of now. That won't take long! That's not a desperate plan to defend dollar hegemony at all, and entirely plausible! What could go wrong?

[figmentofmyass]

it's pretty ironic. in years past, everyone would FUD about how much hash power was concentrated in china. in this new narrative of potential transaction censorship by north american miners, chinese miners will actually be the solution to our problem---they don't give a shit about american regulations. and so, bitcoin will work as intended.

given the scale of crypto capital flight out of china, i also wonder if the chinese government might eventually press chinese miners to censor such transactions. with any luck, foreign miners will render this approach completely ineffective.

[Carlton Banks]

given the scale of crypto capital flight out of china, i also wonder if the chinese government might eventually press chinese miners to censor such transactions. with any luck, foreign miners will render this approach completely ineffective.

even miners from states considered 'rogues' by both china and the US won't cut it, think of how much illegal indoor cannabis growing still takes place across North America and Europe. I'm well aware that police and intelligence are often involved in or aware of the details of such things, but remember the reason for that: the real world is much more complicated than politicians or the dying corporate media typically choose to present it, corruption of the rule of law is absolutely required by all those who are supposed to be safeguarding it, for a multitude of reasons of such breadth and depth that it would probably all be mind-bendingly staggering if publicly known. Even just a small amount beneath the surface of this veneer, it is entirely publicly acknowledged by e.g. the police that both lying and breaking the law is a necessary part of doing their job ("it takes a thief to catch a thief"), it's police policy to train officers lie to the public to "keep them safe"

I think we're heading into an even more schizoid display of public life (the signs are already more apparent than ever): politicians, the police and business/finance figures will be publicly stating how terrible free and uncensored Bitcoin use is, and those same people will be regularly getting caught doing something stupid that absolutely contradicts what they professed in public previously. Slowly at first, the public will figure out that there's no fighting it

[acquafredda]

Since its inception in 2009 bitcoin, intended as a protocol, as a network, as a payment system etc. had to face any possible threat that is available in the modernised world!
Hacker fought hard to break it - FAIL
Regulators fought hard to control it - FAIL
New coins claimed to be better than bitcoin - FAIL

The above does not mean bitcoin won. Bitcoin is still fighting hard and until we keep it like this we will probably maintain the very last outpost of freedom available for human beings.
Look around, dystopia is all around us.

[stompix]

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.

[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.

[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".