The negative impact of mining farms

[NotLambchop]

...
You do know that likely the biggest mining company out there, BitFury, sells industrial mining gears to other miners...

I know that KNC, one of the largest companies out there, is

<== click



A fraction of one of KNC's megafarms.

[1714293261]

1714293261

[1714293261]

1714293261

[1714293261]

1714293261

[brg444]

...
You do know that likely the biggest mining company out there, BitFury, sells industrial mining gears to other miners...

I know that KNC, one of the largest companies out there, is

<== click



A fraction of one of KNC's megafarms.

That's cause they moved all the consumer products to cloud mining contracts since only small fries were buying from them and small fries can't break even anymore and so don't buy much gear (especially considering KnC history of shady business in that regard)

Cloud mining contracts also qualifies as "enabling others to compete with them" or at least split the revenue pie.

So I win again, troll.

[labsbitforum]

You do know that likely the biggest mining company out there, BitFury, sells industrial mining gears to other miners. I would say this qualifies as "enabling others to compete with them". They actually offer the service of building data centers and supplying mining equipment for mining operations i.e. other Bitcoin miners.

In fact, every mining companies in the ecosystem probably mine Bitcoins themselves AND sell mining gear. So your point really doesn't make any sense, at all.

So if a mining company makes a rig that is projected to generate $10,000 worth of bitcoin what do you think they will sell it for?

A.  $8,000 basically giving someone $2,000 because they just love people and support bitcoin.
B.  $10,000 because it allows them to get the $10K right away upfront locking in maximum profit right away.  (This leaves the buyer $0 in profit because they paid what it was going to produce)
C.  $12,000 Suckers!  Person buying looses $2,000 because they were overly optimistic about something.  

The answer is C or some form of it.  KNC characterized their shift to just mining themselves as more honest.

[NotLambchop]

...
Cloud mining contracts also qualifies as "enabling others to compete with them" or at least split the revenue pie.
...

*Your manners aren't improving, faggot.

[MrBig]

You do know that likely the biggest mining company out there, BitFury, sells industrial mining gears to other miners. I would say this qualifies as "enabling others to compete with them". They actually offer the service of building data centers and supplying mining equipment for mining operations i.e. other Bitcoin miners.

In fact, every mining companies in the ecosystem probably mine Bitcoins themselves AND sell mining gear. So your point really doesn't make any sense, at all.

So if a mining company makes a rig that is projected to generate $10,000 worth of bitcoin what do you think they will sell it for?

A.  $8,000 basically giving someone $2,000 because they just love people and support bitcoin.
B.  $10,000 because it allows them to get the $10K right away upfront locking in maximum profit right away.  (This leaves the buyer $0 in profit because they paid what it was going to produce)
C.  $12,000 Suckers!  Person buying looses $2,000 because they were overly optimistic about something.  

The answer is C or some form of it.  KNC characterized their shift to just mining themselves as more honest.

unfortunately, most of the naysayers would choose option A, as they believe that mining companies are some of the biggest supporters of BTC.

[brg444]

...
Cloud mining contracts also qualifies as "enabling others to compete with them" or at least split the revenue pie.
...

*Your manners aren't improving, faggot.

the logic is : why should they split the pie

the reality is : they do

learn to logic, troll

[brg444]

You do know that likely the biggest mining company out there, BitFury, sells industrial mining gears to other miners. I would say this qualifies as "enabling others to compete with them". They actually offer the service of building data centers and supplying mining equipment for mining operations i.e. other Bitcoin miners.

In fact, every mining companies in the ecosystem probably mine Bitcoins themselves AND sell mining gear. So your point really doesn't make any sense, at all.

So if a mining company makes a rig that is projected to generate $10,000 worth of bitcoin what do you think they will sell it for?

A.  $8,000 basically giving someone $2,000 because they just love people and support bitcoin.
B.  $10,000 because it allows them to get the $10K right away upfront locking in maximum profit right away.  (This leaves the buyer $0 in profit because they paid what it was going to produce)
C.  $12,000 Suckers!  Person buying looses $2,000 because they were overly optimistic about something.  

The answer is C or some form of it.  KNC characterized their shift to just mining themselves as more honest.

 

what has this anything to do with what I said?

My point is that it doesn't make sense for a company to enable others to compete with them.

this is what I replied to. if mining companies would not want others to compete with them they would not sell mining gear, not offer cloud mining service and simply keep all of that good stuff to themselves.

the reality is...they don't! cause they need other revenue streams so that they don't have to sell their BTC reserve to grow their company.

[jinxx]

do you think miners are backing out, since they spent so much on the mining gear.

[NotLambchop]

...
Cloud mining contracts also qualifies as "enabling others to compete with them" or at least split the revenue pie.
...

*Your manners aren't improving, faggot.

the logic is : why should they split the pie

the reality is : they do

learn to logic, troll

If you think selling mining contracts = "splitting the pie," you'll be interested to learn that ~99% of those lose coin for the intrepid "investors."

But rubes getting ripped off by mining cos is entirely beside the point--we were talking about the harm to done to Bitcoin's decentralization by megamines.
Surprising foray into stupidity, even for a tactless little faggot like you

[jinxx]

...
You do know that likely the biggest mining company out there, BitFury, sells industrial mining gears to other miners...

I know that KNC, one of the largest companies out there, is

<== click



A fraction of one of KNC's megafarms.

if they can pump out so much bitcoins, isnt this a monopoly game in mining.. and its 1 sided to people who have those kind of institutional resources.

[MrBig]

...
You do know that likely the biggest mining company out there, BitFury, sells industrial mining gears to other miners...

I know that KNC, one of the largest companies out there, is

<== click



A fraction of one of KNC's megafarms.

if they can pump out so much bitcoins, isnt this a monopoly game in mining.. and its 1 sided to people who have those kind of institutional resources.

That's exactly what it is and the main point of this thread. Somehow, that logic seems to elude a plethora of bitsheep and their perpetual bleating of trying to turn any events surrounding BTC into great news.

- mtgox hacked, millions of $ lost: great news
- centralization of mining: great news
- BTC price crash: more cheap coins
- rampant scamming in BTC: it's the victim's fault
- government regulation: to da moon, best news ever
- illicit marketplaces: drug dealers are like robin hoods of crypto

Now I'm not saying that every news regarding btc is bad. It's just that some people here try to twist everything to look favourable for btc when it's obvious that isn't the case.

[sublime5447]

...
You do know that likely the biggest mining company out there, BitFury, sells industrial mining gears to other miners...

I know that KNC, one of the largest companies out there, is

<== click



A fraction of one of KNC's megafarms.

if they can pump out so much bitcoins, isnt this a monopoly game in mining.. and its 1 sided to people who have those kind of institutional resources.

That's exactly what it is and the main point of this thread. Somehow, that logic seems to elude a plethora of bitsheep and their perpetual bleating of trying to turn any events surrounding BTC into great news.

- mtgox hacked, millions of $ lost: great news
- centralization of mining: great news
- BTC price crash: more cheap coins
- rampant scamming in BTC: it's the victim's fault
- government regulation: to da moon, best news ever
- illicit marketplaces: drug dealers are like robin hoods of crypto

Now I'm not saying that every news regarding btc is bad. It's just that some people here try to twist everything to look favourable for btc when it's obvious that isn't the case.

Have you not figured it out yet bro? That is because they have a financial gain in making suckers believe that. Bitcoin isn't all its cracked up to be. I have traded thousands of coins and spent countless hours studying. Its bullshit. Brg444 is the kinda retard that laps it up. Its not about real change but personal gain.

[labsbitforum]

Have you not figured it out yet bro? That is because they have a financial gain in making suckers believe that. Bitcoin isn't all its cracked up to be. I have traded thousands of coins and spent countless hours studying. Its bullshit. Brg444 is the kinda retard that laps it up. Its not about real change but personal gain.

It is/was about real change but there was too much money in play and it drifted off its intended path.  It's still possible that bitcoin could get back on track but its looking more and more likely that it will be superseded by a 2.0 successor.

[sublime5447]

Have you not figured it out yet bro? That is because they have a financial gain in making suckers believe that. Bitcoin isn't all its cracked up to be. I have traded thousands of coins and spent countless hours studying. Its bullshit. Brg444 is the kinda retard that laps it up. Its not about real change but personal gain.

It is/was about real change but there was too much money in play and it drifted off its intended path.  It's still possible that bitcoin could get back on track but its looking more and more likely that it will be superseded by a 2.0 successor.

No bro it was about get rich quick, scarcity model bullshit... same thing that has been fucking over the masses for the last 6k years at least. Not a merit based system.

[brg444]

Have you not figured it out yet bro? That is because they have a financial gain in making suckers believe that. Bitcoin isn't all its cracked up to be. I have traded thousands of coins and spent countless hours studying. Its bullshit. Brg444 is the kinda retard that laps it up. Its not about real change but personal gain.

It is/was about real change but there was too much money in play and it drifted off its intended path.  It's still possible that bitcoin could get back on track but its looking more and more likely that it will be superseded by a 2.0 successor.

No bro it was about get rich quick, scarcity model bullshit... same thing that has been fucking over the masses for the last 6k years at least. Not a merit based system.

 

you are so basic

[sublime5447]

Have you not figured it out yet bro? That is because they have a financial gain in making suckers believe that. Bitcoin isn't all its cracked up to be. I have traded thousands of coins and spent countless hours studying. Its bullshit. Brg444 is the kinda retard that laps it up. Its not about real change but personal gain.

It is/was about real change but there was too much money in play and it drifted off its intended path.  It's still possible that bitcoin could get back on track but its looking more and more likely that it will be superseded by a 2.0 successor.

No bro it was about get rich quick, scarcity model bullshit... same thing that has been fucking over the masses for the last 6k years at least. Not a merit based system.

 

you are so basic

I unignored you for this! You are a faggot, get lost retard.

[brg444]

I unignored you for this! You are a faggot, get lost retard.

 

[dropt]

You do know that likely the biggest mining company out there, BitFury, sells industrial mining gears to other miners. I would say this qualifies as "enabling others to compete with them". They actually offer the service of building data centers and supplying mining equipment for mining operations i.e. other Bitcoin miners.

In fact, every mining companies in the ecosystem probably mine Bitcoins themselves AND sell mining gear. So your point really doesn't make any sense, at all.

So if a mining company makes a rig that is projected to generate $10,000 worth of bitcoin what do you think they will sell it for?

A.  $8,000 basically giving someone $2,000 because they just love people and support bitcoin.
B.  $10,000 because it allows them to get the $10K right away upfront locking in maximum profit right away.  (This leaves the buyer $0 in profit because they paid what it was going to produce)
C.  $12,000 Suckers!  Person buying looses $2,000 because they were overly optimistic about something.  

The answer is C or some form of it.  KNC characterized their shift to just mining themselves as more honest.

unfortunately, most of the naysayers would choose option A, as they believe that mining companies are some of the biggest supporters of BTC.

What's wrong with option A?  As the manuf. you sell for $8,000 today or try to mine the $10,000 over the next five months, but really you have to mine more than $10,000 because you have to pay for power and somewhere to put the machine.  That's not evem considering the possibility that the exchange rate may go to shit. While you might actually earn more BTC than it would have net you if you had just sold the unit outright, the shit exch. rate means you actually lost money relative to the $8,00 you could have made from the get go.  Further that's not even considering the opportunity cost by having your return tied up in a miner which has to earn it back over time.

But, yes. C

[scarsbergholden]

...
You do know that likely the biggest mining company out there, BitFury, sells industrial mining gears to other miners...

I know that KNC, one of the largest companies out there, is

<== click



A fraction of one of KNC's megafarms.

if they can pump out so much bitcoins, isnt this a monopoly game in mining.. and its 1 sided to people who have those kind of institutional resources.

That's exactly what it is and the main point of this thread. Somehow, that logic seems to elude a plethora of bitsheep and their perpetual bleating of trying to turn any events surrounding BTC into great news.

- mtgox hacked, millions of $ lost: great news
- centralization of mining: great news
- BTC price crash: more cheap coins
- rampant scamming in BTC: it's the victim's fault
- government regulation: to da moon, best news ever
- illicit marketplaces: drug dealers are like robin hoods of crypto

Now I'm not saying that every news regarding btc is bad. It's just that some people here try to twist everything to look favourable for btc when it's obvious that isn't the case.

Well you are not going to find a very balanced discussion on here. Most people to migrate to this forum are going to be pro-bitcoin as they would not come here if they were not. Granted there are some bears, but they are vastly outnumbered.

I would argue that KnC would want to get out of the retail business because of the risks associated with selling via retail. People can claim they received defective miners and request a refund, and can claim that that they did not receive their machine, or could claim that the shipping times were excessive. The psedo anon nature of bitcoin would make it very difficult prove these claims either way and the number of bitcoin related scams are high enough that this probably happens often to them. This will result in a lot of regulatory risk

[labsbitforum]

You do know that likely the biggest mining company out there, BitFury, sells industrial mining gears to other miners. I would say this qualifies as "enabling others to compete with them". They actually offer the service of building data centers and supplying mining equipment for mining operations i.e. other Bitcoin miners.

In fact, every mining companies in the ecosystem probably mine Bitcoins themselves AND sell mining gear. So your point really doesn't make any sense, at all.

So if a mining company makes a rig that is projected to generate $10,000 worth of bitcoin what do you think they will sell it for?

A.  $8,000 basically giving someone $2,000 because they just love people and support bitcoin.
B.  $10,000 because it allows them to get the $10K right away upfront locking in maximum profit right away.  (This leaves the buyer $0 in profit because they paid what it was going to produce)
C.  $12,000 Suckers!  Person buying looses $2,000 because they were overly optimistic about something.  

The answer is C or some form of it.  KNC characterized their shift to just mining themselves as more honest.

unfortunately, most of the naysayers would choose option A, as they believe that mining companies are some of the biggest supporters of BTC.

What's wrong with option A?  As the manuf. you sell for $8,000 today or try to mine the $10,000 over the next five months, but really you have to mine more than $10,000 because you have to pay for power and somewhere to put the machine.  That's not evem considering the possibility that the exchange rate may go to shit. While you might actually earn more BTC than it would have net you if you had just sold the unit outright, the shit exch. rate means you actually lost money relative to the $8,00 you could have made from the get go.  Further that's not even considering the opportunity cost by having your return tied up in a miner which has to earn it back over time.

But, yes. C

I do believe that many ASIC/rig makers adopted a variant of A.  There is a discount that should be given to lock in 80% of what you think its worth up front and remove the uncertainty.  They don't have perfect insight in to where the price is going either.  They have lots of capital in play and I'm sure spend a tremendous amount of time obsessing about their profitability projections and trying to stay competitive with other makers.

As mining has evolved over the past year or so you can see it shifting much more to C and then to D:

D.  Not for sale.  We have enough capital now to grow on our own.  We didn't expect the price was going to fall so much and leave our customers so far under water.  Sorry.  We decided we can do better on our own.  The real production costs are not that high now that we are up and running.  Having customers or limited share holders does not provide enough benefit to outweigh the issues associated with them.

I'm sure some manufacturers are good and some are evil greedy bastards.  In the end it doesn't matter and they are all competing as businesses do.  The normal evolution of business is consolidation to get scale.  Capitalism is a great motivator and makes things move very fast.  But, its eventual outcome often is monopoly which is a horrible end result.  If market forces don't change the fundamentals to knock out monopolies then enter government and regulation to break it up and restart the cycle.  At least that is what should happen.  More and more you see business subvert the government to prevent the regulation and break up of their monopoly.  History shows that will lead to public uprising and revolt.  A horrible prospect to envision happening in modern times.

Bitcoin was intended to be more egalitarian, liberating, and peer-to-peer. More like bittorrent, seti@home, folding@home, etc.  It sprung out of those those ideas.  Satoshi wasn't trying to launch a get rich quick scheme for himself or others.  Quite the opposite.

It's too bad that bitcoin allowed dedicated silicon (FPGA/ASIC) to participate.  If they had adapted to prevent it there still would be large farms of CPU/GPU miners.  But it would be a more level playing field and there would be more use of having that much computational power in play that could also be solving real problems and not just generating a lot of heat and having an overabundance of SHA256 brute force engines lying around.