[CLOSING] GHash.IO mining pool official page

[ernie-]

So in other words you can't understand basic economics.  Price volatility at CEX depends on demand not on logic (if it depended on logic nobody would lose money there).

Here, I'll give you Occam's razor - the price was overinflated and a large holder decided to dump his assets.

And he just happened to do it when the diff changed and cex.io reduced their maint fee from 26c to 20c.

And he is still dumping for several days.... I think not. Something has happened to the GHS price and it's more than a single user dumping.


As it turns out, about 150TH/s seem to have been added to Total GHS available in the past 3 days taking it up to over  232TH/s.

[1713462849]

1713462849

[1713462849]

1713462849

[1713462849]

1713462849

[1713462849]

1713462849

[1713462849]

1713462849

[Bitsaurus]

So in other words you can't understand basic economics.  Price volatility at CEX depends on demand not on logic (if it depended on logic nobody would lose money there).

Here, I'll give you Occam's razor - the price was overinflated and a large holder decided to dump his assets.

And he just happened to do it when the diff changed and cex.io reduced their maint fee from 26c to 20c.

And he is still dumping for several days.... I think not. Something has happened to the GHS price and it's more than a single user dumping.


As it turns out, about 150TH/s seem to have been added to Total GHS available in the past 3 days taking it up to over  232TH/s.

Did you think the price wouldn't deflate because CEX.IO was in some sort of magical isolation bubble?  The traders on there are operating in a fairly land, eventually some reality light will shine in.

[ghash.io]

Last week, London hosted an incredible event, which thundered throughout the Bitcoin community, — CoinSummit conference.

CEX.IO and GHash.IO were glad to support the event with Platinum Sponsorship and make the first step out at such a significant conference.

CoinSummit was the pioneering large-scale event, where CEX.IO has shown the team behind the company to the Bitcoin community offline, which supported our message of being fully transparent and open to the industry. Thus, at the conference, CEX.IO has been presented by five corporate employees. These were Jeffrey Smith (Chief Information Officer), Angelina Wood (Marketing Strategist), Helga Danova (Chief Editor), Pavel Oleynik (Chief Compliance Officer) and Victoria Polyakova (Chief Legal Officer).

On our blog we provide a summary of the conference. We invite you to read it:

http://blog.cex.io/coinsummit-overview/

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/54432554/Coin_Summit_London_Blog1.png

[ghash.io]

Statement Regarding 51% Threat

Considering Bitcoin protocol operation and situation within the mining processes, GHash.IO, as the leading mining pool, would like to make a voluntary statement.

Based on the closed round table discussion, which took place on July 9th in London, GHash.IO states that it will not exceed more than 39.99% of the overall Bitcoin hashrate. If GHash.IO approaches the respective border, it will be actively asking miners to take their hardware away from GHash.IO and mine on other pools

None of the existing technical solutions against the 51% attack threat is able to solve the problem in a long-term perspective, taking into account interests of existing mining pools, individual miners and Bitcoin community. Thus, Bitcoin adherents should focus on temporary acts until the lifetime solution is found.

To make sure the respective solution appears in the nearest future, GHash.IO and CEX.IO are initiating a committee, which will consist of major Bitcoin market players, mining pools and other voluntary Bitcoin companies, with the purpose of accelerating and motivating developers to find a technical solution for the 51% threat by accumulating funds and directing them to this process. An original policy document, which describes operational processes of the committee, will be presented shortly. The committee will drive closer communication and cooperation between developers working on the Bitcoin protocol and solving the 51% issue, and businesses, highly interested in expanding the industry, and promote Bitcoin to a broader audience.

With this statement, we invite other mining pools to become more transparent to the community, issue similar statements from their sides and declare that they won’t overcome 39.99% of the Bitcoin hashrate as well. We believe that mining pools should support the statement, since any of them can possibly take leading positions and appear on GHash.IO place.

We also do encourage Bitcoin market players to join the upcoming committee, assist in supporting Bitcoin developers, actively participate in the Bitcoin community, become ultimately transparent, join forces for developing Bitcoin and promote cryptocurrency to the world.

Our statement is available to view on our blog: http://blog.cex.io/official-statement-on-51-threat-and-closed-round-table/

A summary from the round table discussion can be viewed and downloaded here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/234153249/CoinSummit-Bitcoin-Meeting

[zvs]

Statement Regarding 51% Threat

Considering Bitcoin protocol operation and situation within the mining processes, GHash.IO, as the leading mining pool, would like to make a voluntary statement.

Based on the closed round table discussion, which took place on July 9th in London, GHash.IO states that it will not exceed more than 39.99% of the overall Bitcoin hashrate. If GHash.IO approaches the respective border, it will be actively asking miners to take their hardware away from GHash.IO and mine on other pools

None of the existing technical solutions against the 51% attack threat is able to solve the problem in a long-term perspective, taking into account interests of existing mining pools, individual miners and Bitcoin community. Thus, Bitcoin adherents should focus on temporary acts until the lifetime solution is found.

To make sure the respective solution appears in the nearest future, GHash.IO and CEX.IO are initiating a committee, which will consist of major Bitcoin market players, mining pools and other voluntary Bitcoin companies, with the purpose of accelerating and motivating developers to find a technical solution for the 51% threat by accumulating funds and directing them to this process. An original policy document, which describes operational processes of the committee, will be presented shortly. The committee will drive closer communication and cooperation between developers working on the Bitcoin protocol and solving the 51% issue, and businesses, highly interested in expanding the industry, and promote Bitcoin to a broader audience.

With this statement, we invite other mining pools to become more transparent to the community, issue similar statements from their sides and declare that they won’t overcome 39.99% of the Bitcoin hashrate as well. We believe that mining pools should support the statement, since any of them can possibly take leading positions and appear on GHash.IO place.

We also do encourage Bitcoin market players to join the upcoming committee, assist in supporting Bitcoin developers, actively participate in the Bitcoin community, become ultimately transparent, join forces for developing Bitcoin and promote cryptocurrency to the world.

Our statement is available to view on our blog: http://blog.cex.io/official-statement-on-51-threat-and-closed-round-table/

A summary from the round table discussion can be viewed and downloaded here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/234153249/CoinSummit-Bitcoin-Meeting

The technical solution would just be more companies making ASICs for bitcoin?  Isn't the problem here that your company is churning out so many and using them to mine?  Sure, some individuals mines at your pool, but that's some small bit of your total hashing power.

I'll gladly take some of those ASICs off your hands if you sell them to me for cost + shipping + a 50% margin (instead of something like 2000% on those horrible USBs)

[ghash.io]

  ***Dear miners, we are approaching 39.99% of the Bitcoin hashrate. Please, move your mining hardware to other pools. Thank you for understanding!***

[byt411]

  ***Dear miners, we are approaching 39.99% of the Bitcoin hashrate. Please, move your mining hardware to other pools. Thank you for understanding!***

Dear Ghash.io and Cex.io, please stop being a huge retard, or maybe you're doing it on purpose, I don't know.
If you actually want to take an effort in bringing your hashrate below 39.99%, you can simply refuse connection for new miners. That's it. It isn't even that difficult to implement. Constantly posting messages and making announcements doesn't help at all.

[guitarplinker]

Why not temporarily increase fees at the pool until the pool has a more reasonable hashrate?

Slowly increase the fee until the pool hashrate falls enough to only be 30% of the network, or something like that.

[fivejonnyfive]

Why not temporarily increase fees at the pool until the pool has a more reasonable hashrate?

Slowly increase the fee until the pool hashrate falls enough to only be 30% of the network, or something like that.

I support this idea.

Also, deny new connections or even disconnect existing ones.
My miners all have failovers, drop my connection for instance, and I'll simply be mining on a different pool.

Maybe, start issuing warnings at 39%, denying new connections at 40%, dropping connections at 41%

[byt411]

Why not temporarily increase fees at the pool until the pool has a more reasonable hashrate?

Slowly increase the fee until the pool hashrate falls enough to only be 30% of the network, or something like that.

I support this idea.

Also, deny new connections or even disconnect existing ones.
My miners all have failovers, drop my connection for instance, and I'll simply be mining on a different pool.

Maybe, start issuing warnings at 39%, denying new connections at 40%, dropping connections at 41%

Dropping connections wouldn't be fair, simply denying new connections yes. Or what they could do is disconnect everyone, and once everyone starts to reconnect, deny new connections once it reaches 39.99%

[fivejonnyfive]

Why not temporarily increase fees at the pool until the pool has a more reasonable hashrate?

Slowly increase the fee until the pool hashrate falls enough to only be 30% of the network, or something like that.

I support this idea.

Also, deny new connections or even disconnect existing ones.
My miners all have failovers, drop my connection for instance, and I'll simply be mining on a different pool.

Maybe, start issuing warnings at 39%, denying new connections at 40%, dropping connections at 41%

Dropping connections wouldn't be fair, simply denying new connections yes. Or what they could do is disconnect everyone, and once everyone starts to reconnect, deny new connections once it reaches 39.99%

Why wouldn't it be fair? Announce to everyone that this is happening and advise that failover pools are required, then when push comes to shove drop the newest connections. Seems fair to me.

[jonnybravo0311]

Why get so complicated?  At 39.99%, stop accepting new connections.  No need to do anything like examine when a miner connected to determine if it is eligible to be dropped.

[nottm28]

  ***Dear miners, we are approaching 39.99% of the Bitcoin hashrate. Please, move your mining hardware to other pools. Thank you for understanding!***

What a farce - this is a joke of an effort - so they can say "We did everything we could". Pathetic.

[psahx]

It would be more than enough, if they started to refuse new registrations starting now.

Unfortunately they will not do that, they will rather makeup some random bullshit reason, to avoid it.

To GHASH.IO:

If you are honest, and you really mean what you do write, then go ahead and close the registration to new users. No need of implementing any fees or disconnecting existing users. You can open it once you drop to 25%, hypothetically. And, if there is a 0.001% chance, that you really mean to prevent centralization, why don't you sell some part of your mining gear for a reasonable price to us? I think the answer is too obvious, because you do not care, you just care to have more profit. You will pretend you are concerned about 51%, but in reality you are not. Everything that matters to you is just your own profit.

Prove me I am wrong, with action of course, no philosophical debates, just action, and I will owe you an apology, I will tatoo GHASH.IO logo on my chest.

Cheers!

[mazedk]

Is it possible somehow to mine on ghash.io on port 443? (firewall issue)

[dropt]

Is it possible somehow to mine on ghash.io on port 443? (firewall issue)

No.  On another note: quit being part of the problem.

[byt411]

Why not temporarily increase fees at the pool until the pool has a more reasonable hashrate?

Slowly increase the fee until the pool hashrate falls enough to only be 30% of the network, or something like that.

I support this idea.

Also, deny new connections or even disconnect existing ones.
My miners all have failovers, drop my connection for instance, and I'll simply be mining on a different pool.

Maybe, start issuing warnings at 39%, denying new connections at 40%, dropping connections at 41%

Dropping connections wouldn't be fair, simply denying new connections yes. Or what they could do is disconnect everyone, and once everyone starts to reconnect, deny new connections once it reaches 39.99%

Why wouldn't it be fair? Announce to everyone that this is happening and advise that failover pools are required, then when push comes to shove drop the newest connections. Seems fair to me.

If they're in, they're in, you can't just choose random people to kick out. Denying new connections is the best option.

[jjc326]

Why not temporarily increase fees at the pool until the pool has a more reasonable hashrate?

Slowly increase the fee until the pool hashrate falls enough to only be 30% of the network, or something like that.

I support this idea.

Also, deny new connections or even disconnect existing ones.
My miners all have failovers, drop my connection for instance, and I'll simply be mining on a different pool.

Maybe, start issuing warnings at 39%, denying new connections at 40%, dropping connections at 41%

Dropping connections wouldn't be fair, simply denying new connections yes. Or what they could do is disconnect everyone, and once everyone starts to reconnect, deny new connections once it reaches 39.99%

Why wouldn't it be fair? Announce to everyone that this is happening and advise that failover pools are required, then when push comes to shove drop the newest connections. Seems fair to me.

If they're in, they're in, you can't just choose random people to kick out. Denying new connections is the best option.

True, but you can try to make people voluntarily leave by raising fees. I'm almost positive another pool did this in the relatively recent past and it worked to make people leave. Can't remember the pool though but like in the last 1.5 years. Seems simple enough and might actually earn pool owner some more money!

[dropt]

True, but you can try to make people voluntarily leave by raising fees. I'm almost positive another pool did this in the relatively recent past and it worked to make people leave. Can't remember the pool though but like in the last 1.5 years. Seems simple enough and might actually earn pool owner some more money!

It was BTCGuild, and it worked quite well IIRC.

[byt411]

Why not temporarily increase fees at the pool until the pool has a more reasonable hashrate?

Slowly increase the fee until the pool hashrate falls enough to only be 30% of the network, or something like that.

I support this idea.

Also, deny new connections or even disconnect existing ones.
My miners all have failovers, drop my connection for instance, and I'll simply be mining on a different pool.

Maybe, start issuing warnings at 39%, denying new connections at 40%, dropping connections at 41%

Dropping connections wouldn't be fair, simply denying new connections yes. Or what they could do is disconnect everyone, and once everyone starts to reconnect, deny new connections once it reaches 39.99%

Why wouldn't it be fair? Announce to everyone that this is happening and advise that failover pools are required, then when push comes to shove drop the newest connections. Seems fair to me.

If they're in, they're in, you can't just choose random people to kick out. Denying new connections is the best option.

True, but you can try to make people voluntarily leave by raising fees. I'm almost positive another pool did this in the relatively recent past and it worked to make people leave. Can't remember the pool though but like in the last 1.5 years. Seems simple enough and might actually earn pool owner some more money!

That works too.
I really don't understand why Ghash is ignoring these ideas that we came up with, and they could come up with easily. They say that they're doing everything they can, but that's just not true. They aren't even bothered to reply to us. What do they want to do? Create fear?