Bitcoin Forum
October 23, 2017, 06:55:47 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.0.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Will you support Gavin's new block size limit hard fork of 8MB by January 1, 2016 then doubling every 2 years?
1.  yes
2.  no

Pages: « 1 ... 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 [1225] 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1997086 times)
phoenix1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798



View Profile
May 19, 2015, 11:56:40 PM
 #24481

Also I have never seen anyone in the Philippines use a heating device for anything but cooking.

And why would someone in the developing world use an electric heating device when these are much less efficient than propane.

Sure, there wil be markets where certain appliances are not going to be used. That's a whole other side of the equation. That's one for the marketing department  Wink

"Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves"  - Confucius (China 551BC-479 BC)
1508741747
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508741747

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508741747
Reply with quote  #2

1508741747
Report to moderator
1508741747
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508741747

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508741747
Reply with quote  #2

1508741747
Report to moderator
I HATE TABLES I HATE TABLES I HA(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ TABLES I HATE TABLES I HATE TABLES
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1508741747
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508741747

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508741747
Reply with quote  #2

1508741747
Report to moderator
1508741747
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508741747

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508741747
Reply with quote  #2

1508741747
Report to moderator
1508741747
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508741747

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508741747
Reply with quote  #2

1508741747
Report to moderator
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
May 19, 2015, 11:58:14 PM
 #24482

EDIT: If the wasted heat from mining can be put to good use in a cost effective way, that would definitely be progress

People are already doing that warming their homes in the winter.

But the problem with the economics is the duty cycle of you use of the mining chip is too low if you put it in a toaster or any other personal care drier. The chip has to pay back itself in time as it has a limited period of time that it has cutting edge performance.

This is not about boosting efficiency of mining.

smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1568



View Profile
May 19, 2015, 11:58:51 PM
 #24483

Also I have never seen anyone in the Philippines use a heating device for anything but cooking.

Electric water heating has a significant market share world wide, roughly 40%. Obviously there are other such devices, and markets vary. I guess the Philippines won't be hotbed of Bitcoin mining (that makes logical sense given the waste heat issue, conceivably PV might change that at some point).


phoenix1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798



View Profile
May 20, 2015, 12:00:53 AM
 #24484

EDIT: If the wasted heat from mining can be put to good use in a cost effective way, that would definitely be progress

People are already doing that warming their homes in the winter.

But the problem with the economics is the duty cycle of you use of the mining chip is too low if you put it in a toaster or any other personal care drier. The chip has to pay back itself in time as it has a limited period of time that it has cutting edge performance.

This is not about boosting efficiency of mining.

That was pretty much my original question - the duty cycle of the chips vs life cycle of deomestic appliances and efficiency of the mining

"Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves"  - Confucius (China 551BC-479 BC)
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
May 20, 2015, 12:02:39 AM
 #24485

Also I have never seen anyone in the Philippines use a heating device for anything but cooking.

Electric water heating has a significant market share world wide, roughly 40%.

Afaik, electric heating of anything is incredibly inefficient compared to natural gas or propane. Thus this isn't making the world more energy efficient. This is for people who don't care about efficiency because they can afford the safey and lack of hassles of not using gas.

smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1568



View Profile
May 20, 2015, 12:02:42 AM
 #24486

The chip has to pay back itself in time as it has a limited period of time that it has cutting edge performance.

Not really, no. If the effective efficiency is very close to 100% infinite (which it is), the chip continues to be viable far longer than dedicated mining chips do. It doesn't need cutting edge performance.

Also, we don't know the cost of the chips, but cheap chips can be very, very cheap (<$1). Part of 21's model is silicon IP that you can license to incorporate into an existing chip design (obviously it would be a new design, by existing I mean a chip that already does something else). In terms of production cost for some products that can be literally free (other than IP license fees), if there is extra space on a convenient die size. It will reduce yield but so what, you just ship those as non-mining chips. The ones that work are free.
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1568



View Profile
May 20, 2015, 12:04:04 AM
 #24487

Also I have never seen anyone in the Philippines use a heating device for anything but cooking.

Electric water heating has a significant market share world wide, roughly 40%.

Afaik, electric heating of anything is incredibly inefficient compared to natural gas or propane. Thus this isn't making the world more energy efficient. This is for people who don't care about efficiency because they can afford the safey and lack of hassles of not using gas.

That's an strange way of measuring efficiency (yes I know you said "energy efficiency", I just consider that measurement somewhat irrelevant). If it has better safety and fewer hassles, that increases efficiency.

The fact is, for whatever reasons, 40% of the water heater market buys electric. Unless that changes, adding mining chips to that is essentially free mining.
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
May 20, 2015, 12:06:48 AM
 #24488

The chip has to pay back itself in time as it has a limited period of time that it has cutting edge performance.

Not really, no. If the effective efficiency is very close to 100% (which it is), the chip continues to be viable far longer than dedicate mining chips do.

Also, we don't know the cost of the chips, but cheap chips can be very, very cheap (<$1). Part of 21's model is silicon IP that you can license to incorporate into an existing chip design. In terms of production cost for some products that can be literally free (other than IP license fees), if there is extra space on a convenient die size. It will reduce yield but so what, you just ship those as non-mining chips. The ones that work are free.

If they are only going to put these in personal driers, then I am not concerned. As you admit, a dated chip's market share declines over time and they are used only intermittently. That is such a low use activity it won't compete with full time mining for market share.

It is the putting of this into phones that alarms me. They are locking in the masses to one money choice (one hashing algorithm at least and we don't know what requirements governments can require these chips to have in the future).

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
May 20, 2015, 12:11:10 AM
 #24489

Also I have never seen anyone in the Philippines use a heating device for anything but cooking.

Electric water heating has a significant market share world wide, roughly 40%.

Afaik, electric heating of anything is incredibly inefficient compared to natural gas or propane. Thus this isn't making the world more energy efficient. This is for people who don't care about efficiency because they can afford the safey and lack of hassles of not using gas.

That's an strange way of measuring efficiency (yes I know you said "energy efficiency", I just consider that measurement somewhat irrelevant). If it has better safety and fewer hassles, that increases efficiency.

The fact is, for whatever reasons, 40% of the water heater market buys electric. Unless that changes, adding mining chips to that is essentially free mining.

Free for whom? Those who will spend outrageous amount to heat with electricity are receiving an insignificant amount of gain. You can give me 10 free pennies per month and I don't have the time to pick them up off the ground. They are not free for me to pick up.

This doesn't aid mankind in any way unless you argue that getting people to do micropayments with a decentralized model of adoption and choice won't otherwise happen. It is way to lock people into a specific money system, especially one with very long time frames on replacement hardware, thus discouraging any competition on money with the government's coin.

And this is why if we are going to offer any decentralized choice for micropayment distribution, we had damn well better release it tomorrow.

smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1568



View Profile
May 20, 2015, 12:12:07 AM
 #24490

If they are only going to put these in personal driers, then I am not concerned. As you admit, a dated chip's market share declines over time and they are used only intermittently. That is such a low use activity it won't compete with full time mining for market share.

It might if there are enough of them. I don't really know how these numbers work out, considering for example electric water heaters, or every home having several of these chips in different devices (clothes dryer, hair dryer, dishwasher, portable heater, etc.)

Quote
It is the putting of this into phones that alarms me. They are locking in the masses to one money choice (one hashing algorithm at least and we don't know what requirements governments can require these chips to have in the future).

Yes, that's a completely different approach and business model, as I said earlier. There is no free mining to be had on a phone. I'm frankly not too worried (incrementally) because phones are likely already the most thoroughly government controlled and compromised devices in existence.
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1568



View Profile
May 20, 2015, 12:14:45 AM
 #24491

Also I have never seen anyone in the Philippines use a heating device for anything but cooking.

Electric water heating has a significant market share world wide, roughly 40%.

Afaik, electric heating of anything is incredibly inefficient compared to natural gas or propane. Thus this isn't making the world more energy efficient. This is for people who don't care about efficiency because they can afford the safey and lack of hassles of not using gas.

That's an strange way of measuring efficiency (yes I know you said "energy efficiency", I just consider that measurement somewhat irrelevant). If it has better safety and fewer hassles, that increases efficiency.

The fact is, for whatever reasons, 40% of the water heater market buys electric. Unless that changes, adding mining chips to that is essentially free mining.

Free for whom? Those who will spend outrageous amount to heat with electricity are receiving an insignificant amount of gain. You can give me 10 free pennies per month and I don't have the time to pick them up off the ground. They are not free for me to pick up.

Free in that of 100 customers in the world, 60 won't buy an electric heater. Fine. 40 will. If we divide those into 20 with miner chip (or even quite a few chips) and 20 without, both sets pay the same amount of electricity for the same amount of hot water. One mines Bitcoin, the other does not. Whether you think the 20 mining Bitcoin with no added electricity cost is a good or bad thing is likely going to depend on your opinion of Bitcoin, fair enough. But the fact of mining itself has no operational cost here, and I'm guessing that the chip cost can also be very, very low.
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
May 20, 2015, 12:15:17 AM
 #24492

Quote
It is the putting of this into phones that alarms me. They are locking in the masses to one money choice (one hashing algorithm at least and we don't know what requirements governments can require these chips to have in the future).

Yes, that's a completely different approach and business model, as I said earlier. There is no free mining to be had on a phone. I'm frankly not too worried (incrementally) because phones are likely already the most thoroughly government controlled and compromised devices in existence.

The danger is not from phones becoming more controlled, it is from locking in people who are not yet on any electronic money system into the government's preferred one.

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
May 20, 2015, 12:16:56 AM
 #24493

Also I have never seen anyone in the Philippines use a heating device for anything but cooking.

Electric water heating has a significant market share world wide, roughly 40%.

Afaik, electric heating of anything is incredibly inefficient compared to natural gas or propane. Thus this isn't making the world more energy efficient. This is for people who don't care about efficiency because they can afford the safey and lack of hassles of not using gas.

That's an strange way of measuring efficiency (yes I know you said "energy efficiency", I just consider that measurement somewhat irrelevant). If it has better safety and fewer hassles, that increases efficiency.

The fact is, for whatever reasons, 40% of the water heater market buys electric. Unless that changes, adding mining chips to that is essentially free mining.

Free for whom? Those who will spend outrageous amount to heat with electricity are receiving an insignificant amount of gain. You can give me 10 free pennies per month and I don't have the time to pick them up off the ground. They are not free for me to pick up.

Free in that of 100 customers in the world, 60 won't buy an electric heater. Fine. 40 will. If we divide those into 20 with miner chip (or even quite a few chips) and 20 without, both sets pay the same amount of electricity for the same amount of hot water. One mines Bitcoin, the other does not. Whether you think the 20 mining Bitcoin with no added electricity cost is a good or bad thing is likely going to depend on your opinion of Bitcoin, fair enough. But the fact of mining itself has no operational cost here, and I'm guessing that the chip cost can also be very, very low.

Did you crop my post or was I still editing it when you replied? I don't think you responded to my point at all.

I did not ask "free in that". I asked "free for whom?". Who gets something free that they even notice?

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
May 20, 2015, 12:23:03 AM
 #24494

Quote
It is the putting of this into phones that alarms me. They are locking in the masses to one money choice (one hashing algorithm at least and we don't know what requirements governments can require these chips to have in the future).

Yes, that's a completely different approach and business model, as I said earlier. There is no free mining to be had on a phone. I'm frankly not too worried (incrementally) because phones are likely already the most thoroughly government controlled and compromised devices in existence.

The danger is not from phones becoming more controlled, it is from locking in people who are not yet on any electronic money system into the government's preferred one.

.gov prefers Bitcoin now? What don't I see?

If you lock up enough people into Bitcoin, the "winner take all" proposition of network effects and money is more likely. You may be aware of the threat, but I assert most people are clueless. If we have some time to introduce them to the Knowledge Age and find things they like to do that they need a non-Bitcoin system for, then we have a chance to avoid the NWO-everywhere outcome. But this accelerated method of exposing people to Bitcoin via forced mining leapfrogs normal methods and means of discovery and adoption (which rpietila says can normally be a 24 month process for each individual).

Tell people they can get free money. Don't tell them their electric bill will increase by $1 per month. They don't notice. They get some free crap for their cell phone such as ring tones.  They become enslaved to the government coin. Later they need these credits to access their Facebook. Later you can't board a plane if you don't have these credits. Etc...

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
May 20, 2015, 12:28:32 AM
 #24495

Sticking chips in toasters wasn't Uncle Sam's bright idea tho. It was a wacky startup with VC to burn. Seems like a gimmick to me. IDK

They received the most funding of any BC startup ($116 million).

Larry Summers is on their board. He was the first who floated the idea of negative interest rates and electronic currency.

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2015/03/10/the-one-world-currency-not-arriving-voluntarily/

See Larry Summer's role in the NWO.


Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile
May 20, 2015, 12:33:17 AM
 #24496

Also I have never seen anyone in the Philippines use a heating device for anything but cooking.

And why would someone in the developing world use an electric heating device when these are much less efficient than propane.

What I am driving at is the playarefully (w here is not about free electricity. It is about fooling people who don't count their electricity chich is most of us) and/or getting people locked into one form of money that the government can takeover.

The advantage of a CPU is that you can reuse it for many tasks. You don't have to be locked into the chip design that Larry Summers decides should go into your mobile device. This is incredibly 666 directed. Now we have fascist merger of Treasury Dept of the USA and chipsets for mobile phones.
I'm not sure they all have cold showers, but you don't need to look far to see electricity heating is very common wherever there isn't natural gas on demand.

FYI 3rd World people even those with subsidized electricity don't squander it like you think, many have pay as you go metering and are very conscious of when and where to use electricity, it makes up a much bigger portion of there monthly budget so its treated with more respect.

I imagine a network of POS terminals and Wifi hotspots like an internet of things micro hashing away. in some parts of the world hashing can even be used to desalinate water.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1568



View Profile
May 20, 2015, 12:42:29 AM
 #24497

Also I have never seen anyone in the Philippines use a heating device for anything but cooking.

Electric water heating has a significant market share world wide, roughly 40%.

Afaik, electric heating of anything is incredibly inefficient compared to natural gas or propane. Thus this isn't making the world more energy efficient. This is for people who don't care about efficiency because they can afford the safey and lack of hassles of not using gas.

That's an strange way of measuring efficiency (yes I know you said "energy efficiency", I just consider that measurement somewhat irrelevant). If it has better safety and fewer hassles, that increases efficiency.

The fact is, for whatever reasons, 40% of the water heater market buys electric. Unless that changes, adding mining chips to that is essentially free mining.

Free for whom? Those who will spend outrageous amount to heat with electricity are receiving an insignificant amount of gain. You can give me 10 free pennies per month and I don't have the time to pick them up off the ground. They are not free for me to pick up.

Free in that of 100 customers in the world, 60 won't buy an electric heater. Fine. 40 will. If we divide those into 20 with miner chip (or even quite a few chips) and 20 without, both sets pay the same amount of electricity for the same amount of hot water. One mines Bitcoin, the other does not. Whether you think the 20 mining Bitcoin with no added electricity cost is a good or bad thing is likely going to depend on your opinion of Bitcoin, fair enough. But the fact of mining itself has no operational cost here, and I'm guessing that the chip cost can also be very, very low.

Did you crop my post or was I still editing it when you replied? I don't think you responded to my point at all.

I did not ask "free in that". I asked "free for whom?". Who gets something free that they even notice?

The network does. Difficulty goes up. Security goes up. Profitability goes down. Big farms fade away. Maybe. Who gets those Bitcoins does't even matter much. Burn them for all I care.

Of course 21's chips will probably just mine on a pool, which might make things worse than ever. I don't claim this is some kind of cryptonirvana. My comments were focused on the question of efficiency.

The rest of your post was most about whether this is a good thing. I don't know. I have nothing to say about that at this point.
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
May 20, 2015, 12:43:19 AM
 #24498

The only reason to care about energy efficiency is either:

1. You personally care.

2. Society benefits.

I assert neither are true in the case of Westerners using electric water heating. And neither are true in the case of enticing dumb people to adopt Bitcoin so they can get some ringtones and later be enslaved with new requirements for this money.

This is benefiting the utility companies (which the TPTB/government now owns via carbon tax and other regulatory capture) and the enslavement of the dumb, which then pits us who want choice against the inertia.

Of course the way to hide this action is to obscure it in more of the same bullshit as climate change or global warming or environmentalism. This is clearly the fingerprint of the Rockefellers.

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
May 20, 2015, 12:49:42 AM
 #24499

The network does. Difficulty goes up. Security goes up.

Security goes down! These nodes are all serving the designated pool.

Profitability goes down. Big farms fade away. Maybe. Who gets those Bitcoins does't even matter much. Burn them for all I care.

Myopic. Big farms are just usury. This is same usury that is backing utilities. The real profit comes from a monopoly on money, what we were fighting by supporting crypto.

Of course 21's chips will probably just mine on a pool, which might make things worse than ever. I don't claim this is some kind of cryptonirvana. My comments were focused on the question of efficiency.

How can we have a meaningful discussion if you pigeonhole to the irrelevant factors only.

This is not about energy efficiency. You argued very hard that is it about efficiency (energy or otherwise).

pa
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 512


View Profile
May 20, 2015, 12:52:31 AM
 #24500

Monero has lost ~90% of it's value vs. BTC since last September

Uh, no. You are misreading something.

My bad, I was looking at the market cap valuation which is off that much. The BTC price is only down ~75% from last Sept. Still not exactly great price performance....

http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/monero/  (click on "all" for the full history)


There's something buggy about coinmarketcap.com's XMR charting. The "All" chart only goes to Feb 15, before the recent increase in XMR price. For a better price chart, see: https://poloniex.com/exchange#btc_xmr
Pages: « 1 ... 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 [1225] 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 ... 1558 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!