Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[rocks]

I don't agree with Justus's suggestion that altcoin investors are attempting to subvert the basis of money.

Not all of them.

Some of them, and they do as much as they can to encourage others.

Many of the others could be considered unwitting participants.

I want to expand on this a bit.

Consider the modus operandi of David Johnston's Bitangels/Mastercoin mafia.

They rope in mostly young and inexperienced developers via their hackathons that promise (contracts worth up to) large sums of money, then make sure any vaguely interesting idea that emerges gets bolted on to a otherwise-useless appcoin.

They then spend a considerable amount of time promoting the resulting pump and dump. After all possible value has been extracted from the idea they simply move on like a plague of locusts to the next idea. (when was the last time you heard a progress update from APICoin?)

This process generates a large number of accomplices of varying degrees of culpability:

• The developers who get pulled into the system now have their reputations invested in the viability of the appcoin, not to mention the sunk costs of spending so much time on the projects
• The aspiring Bitcoin journalists who helped to promote the appcoins and who accepted advertisement money don't want to admit they participated in something shady without doing any due diligence
• The conference organizers who accepted money from the appcoin project don't want to admit that there are too many Bitcoin conferences to only accept clean money
• The people who bought into the IPO and didn't get out soon enough don't want to admit their money is gone
• The businesses who court outside investment know that some of the investors can't tell the difference between legitimate opportunities and P&D scams, and that many of the investors they court get involved in some of those schemes. They don't want the investors to become spooked and leave the space entirely.

I know of at least two different employees of Bitcoin companies who were required to censor their personal social media accounts on pain of termination because they were being publicly critical of scammy startups. In both cases, their employers cited common investors between the two companies as the reason why criticism could not be allowed.

I also heard one episode of a popular Bitcoin podcast where one of the hosts expressed some regret for accepting work from a project that turned out to be a scam and both other hosts immediately leaped into action to stop her attempt to assume some accountability (lest her example illuminate their lack of assuming similar accountability, presumably).

These bad ideas spread like viruses, and it's increasingly difficult to find somebody who isn't infected to some degree or another.

Excellent summary.

I am not surprised to hear about the bold part, but question whether or not this is legal on an employer's part. Employers can (and should) censor employee communication regarding their specific industry (customers, competitors, etc). But they can not censor employee's speech in general. Obviously there are gray areas on where you draw the line and my understanding is from a legal sense the line fairly well defined to a specific & narrow set of firms that an employer interacts with or competes with. Having an investor with an unrelated investment does not qualify.

A bitcoin company does not work with or compete with an altcoin company, they are in separate areas. I would not be happy with an employer who censored me here, and think I would have legal standing to push back on that.

[1713908742]

1713908742

[1713908742]

1713908742

[1713908742]

1713908742

[phoenix1]

Thanks fo your responses guys - I am going to watch this one with interest, armed with much more knowledge than I had an hour ago and increasing by the minute

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

[TPTB_need_war]

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 play here is not about free electricity. It is about fooling people who don't count their electricity carefully (which 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.

[phoenix1]

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 

[TPTB_need_war]

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]

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]

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

[TPTB_need_war]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.)

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

[smooth]

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.