Bitcoin Forum
April 23, 2024, 05:51:53 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  

Warning: Moderators do not remove likely scams. You must use your own brain: caveat emptor. Watch out for Ponzi schemes. Do not invest more than you can afford to lose.

Warning: One or more bitcointalk.org users have reported that they strongly believe that the creator of this topic is a scammer. (Login to see the detailed trust ratings.) While the bitcointalk.org administration does not verify such claims, you should proceed with extreme caution.
Pages: « 1 ... 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 [498] 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 ... 1348 »
  Print  
Author Topic: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It  (Read 3916318 times)
VolanicEruptor
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 250



View Profile
July 15, 2013, 08:04:48 PM
 #9941

So let's say someone decided to mine a huge portion of the network, such as Friedcat does.  Then they get paid by someone who wants to destroy Bitcoin to deliberately slow their latency down so that they are able to solve blocks with a very minimal amount of transactions. 

You get a few people doing this, and it would destroy Bitcoin.

Much more creative than a 51% attack..

1713851513
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1713851513

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1713851513
Reply with quote  #2

1713851513
Report to moderator
1713851513
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1713851513

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1713851513
Reply with quote  #2

1713851513
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1713851513
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1713851513

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1713851513
Reply with quote  #2

1713851513
Report to moderator
1713851513
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1713851513

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1713851513
Reply with quote  #2

1713851513
Report to moderator
1713851513
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1713851513

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1713851513
Reply with quote  #2

1713851513
Report to moderator
twentyseventy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 1000


View Profile
July 15, 2013, 08:11:11 PM
 #9942

So let's say someone decided to mine a huge portion of the network, such as Friedcat does.  Then they get paid by someone who wants to destroy Bitcoin to deliberately slow their latency down so that they are able to solve blocks with a very minimal amount of transactions. 

You get a few people doing this, and it would destroy Bitcoin.

Much more creative than a 51% attack..

I think a protocol change would be in order then, no?
canth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442
Merit: 1001



View Profile
July 15, 2013, 08:14:50 PM
 #9943

So let's say someone decided to mine a huge portion of the network, such as Friedcat does.  Then they get paid by someone who wants to destroy Bitcoin to deliberately slow their latency down so that they are able to solve blocks with a very minimal amount of transactions. 

You get a few people doing this, and it would destroy Bitcoin.

Much more creative than a 51% attack..

Who benefits from this sort of attack? If they have a reputation and fortune to potentially lose, would they risk a potential lawsuit by bitcoin owners, miners, businesses etc? The only entities that I could see doing something like this would be a government entity (potentially the BRIC countries) that decides bitcoin is too much competition for traditional banking and government controlled fiat.

notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1002


View Profile
July 15, 2013, 08:16:06 PM
 #9944

So let's say someone decided to mine a huge portion of the network, such as Friedcat does.  Then they get paid by someone who wants to destroy Bitcoin to deliberately slow their latency down so that they are able to solve blocks with a very minimal amount of transactions. 

You get a few people doing this, and it would destroy Bitcoin.

Much more creative than a 51% attack..

It would not destroy bitcoin.  It would drive up transaction fees until either not including them is too expensive or more honest miners come online.

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
VolanicEruptor
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 250



View Profile
July 15, 2013, 08:20:50 PM
 #9945

So let's say someone decided to mine a huge portion of the network, such as Friedcat does.  Then they get paid by someone who wants to destroy Bitcoin to deliberately slow their latency down so that they are able to solve blocks with a very minimal amount of transactions. 

You get a few people doing this, and it would destroy Bitcoin.

Much more creative than a 51% attack..

It would not destroy bitcoin.  It would drive up transaction fees until either not including them is too expensive or more honest miners come online.

driving up transaction fees could destroy Bitcoin as an alternate currency, seeing as how low transaction fees is supposed to be one of it's strongest points.

notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1002


View Profile
July 15, 2013, 08:23:28 PM
 #9946

So let's say someone decided to mine a huge portion of the network, such as Friedcat does.  Then they get paid by someone who wants to destroy Bitcoin to deliberately slow their latency down so that they are able to solve blocks with a very minimal amount of transactions.  

You get a few people doing this, and it would destroy Bitcoin.

Much more creative than a 51% attack..

It would not destroy bitcoin.  It would drive up transaction fees until either not including them is too expensive or more honest miners come online.

driving up transaction fees could destroy Bitcoin as an alternate currency, seeing as how low transaction fees is supposed to be one of it's strongest points.

I don't see low transaction fees as among it's strongest features.  More important are decentralized control, potential privacy, and censorship resistance.  In fact these features provide the business case for paying more for transactions than with fiat based systems.  Lower fees are just a nicety of the current economics.

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
VolanicEruptor
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 250



View Profile
July 15, 2013, 08:24:30 PM
 #9947

So let's say someone decided to mine a huge portion of the network, such as Friedcat does.  Then they get paid by someone who wants to destroy Bitcoin to deliberately slow their latency down so that they are able to solve blocks with a very minimal amount of transactions. 

You get a few people doing this, and it would destroy Bitcoin.

Much more creative than a 51% attack..

Who benefits from this sort of attack? If they have a reputation and fortune to potentially lose, would they risk a potential lawsuit by bitcoin owners, miners, businesses etc? The only entities that I could see doing something like this would be a government entity (potentially the BRIC countries) that decides bitcoin is too much competition for traditional banking and government controlled fiat.

If I was a rich asshole heavily invested in the banking industry, I could benefit..
Hell, maybe Satoshi bullied me in school and stole my lunch money.  I'm sure there's many reasons.  Terrorism even comes to mind.. what if I'm a kingpin meth distributor and Silkroad is interfering with my profits?  
I could go and on, so don't ever feel bulletproof based on the reason that the intent isn't there, because it very well could be..

VolanicEruptor
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 250



View Profile
July 15, 2013, 08:25:54 PM
 #9948

So let's say someone decided to mine a huge portion of the network, such as Friedcat does.  Then they get paid by someone who wants to destroy Bitcoin to deliberately slow their latency down so that they are able to solve blocks with a very minimal amount of transactions.  

You get a few people doing this, and it would destroy Bitcoin.

Much more creative than a 51% attack..

It would not destroy bitcoin.  It would drive up transaction fees until either not including them is too expensive or more honest miners come online.

driving up transaction fees could destroy Bitcoin as an alternate currency, seeing as how low transaction fees is supposed to be one of it's strongest points.

I don't see low transaction fees as among it's strongest features.  More important are decentralized control, potential privacy, and censorship resistance.  In fact these features provide the business case for paying more for transactions than with fiat based systems.  Lower fees are just a nicety of the current economics.

Oh really?  Because anytime I have EVER heard of Bitcoin being presented to newcomers its "low transactions fees!", "virtually nothing compared to paypal", etc, etc..

notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1002


View Profile
July 15, 2013, 08:26:15 PM
 #9949

So let's say someone decided to mine a huge portion of the network, such as Friedcat does.  Then they get paid by someone who wants to destroy Bitcoin to deliberately slow their latency down so that they are able to solve blocks with a very minimal amount of transactions. 

You get a few people doing this, and it would destroy Bitcoin.

Much more creative than a 51% attack..

Who benefits from this sort of attack? If they have a reputation and fortune to potentially lose, would they risk a potential lawsuit by bitcoin owners, miners, businesses etc? The only entities that I could see doing something like this would be a government entity (potentially the BRIC countries) that decides bitcoin is too much competition for traditional banking and government controlled fiat.

If I was a rich asshole heavily invested in the banking industry, I could benefit..
Hell, maybe Satoshi bullied me in school and stole my lunch money.  I'm sure there's many reasons.  Terrorism even comes to mind.. what if I'm a kingpin meth distributor and Silkroad is interfering with my profits?  
I could go and on, so don't ever feel bulletproof based on the reason that the intent isn't there, because it very well could be..

If you were a rich asshole heavily invested in the banking industry, and you perceived bitcoin as a threat (unlikely) you would become much wealthier embracing the new technology rather than trying to stifle it.  But there I go assuming wealthy people know anything about history.

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
VolanicEruptor
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 250



View Profile
July 15, 2013, 08:27:40 PM
 #9950

maybe I'm a rich asshole with bad strategy, but I could still view taking down Bitcoin as a viable option..,

binaryFate
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484
Merit: 1003


Still wild and free


View Profile
July 15, 2013, 08:27:54 PM
 #9951

So let's say someone decided to mine a huge portion of the network, such as Friedcat does.  Then they get paid by someone who wants to destroy Bitcoin to deliberately slow their latency down so that they are able to solve blocks with a very minimal amount of transactions. 

You get a few people doing this, and it would destroy Bitcoin.

Much more creative than a 51% attack..

Who benefits from this sort of attack? If they have a reputation and fortune to potentially lose, would they risk a potential lawsuit by bitcoin owners, miners, businesses etc? The only entities that I could see doing something like this would be a government entity (potentially the BRIC countries) that decides bitcoin is too much competition for traditional banking and government controlled fiat.

If I was a rich asshole heavily invested in the banking industry, I could benefit..
Hell, maybe Satoshi bullied me in school and stole my lunch money.  I'm sure there's many reasons.  Terrorism even comes to mind.. what if I'm a kingpin meth distributor and Silkroad is interfering with my profits? 
I could go and on, so don't ever feel bulletproof based on the reason that the intent isn't there, because it very well could be..

You would need to pay more per block than what a miner (AM or another) get in BTC, obviously. Miners (and I bet, AM people too), are seeking BTC success on the long term and could value one BTC much higher than the current price. You would need to pay them *a lot*. And by doing so, they would destroy all their BTC assets value, so you would need to pay them not only for a current block but also for them to give up their whole BTC whealth.
And keep in mind that if you assume miners don't act rationaly anymore, the whole bitcoin system falls appart anyway, AM or not.

Side remark, technically, you don't need to introduce latency to a have a low amount of transactions. Mining uses softwares, we write softwares, they do what we tell them to do, it's not something on which we have no influence Smiley

Monero's privacy and therefore fungibility are MUCH stronger than Bitcoin's. 
This makes Monero a better candidate to deserve the term "digital cash".
notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1002


View Profile
July 15, 2013, 08:30:14 PM
 #9952

Oh really?  Because anytime I have EVER heard of Bitcoin being presented to newcomers is "low transactions fees!", "virtually nothing compared to paypal", etc, etc..

When I was introduced to bitcoin, the pitch didn't even mention fees.  When I pitch bitcoin, I only talk about fees when asked.

Anyway, it seems you are claiming that Bitcoin has no value other than lower fees and will die without them.  Can you explain why decentralized control, potential privacy, and censorship resistance are not worth anything?

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
VolanicEruptor
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 250



View Profile
July 15, 2013, 08:32:36 PM
 #9953

Oh really?  Because anytime I have EVER heard of Bitcoin being presented to newcomers is "low transactions fees!", "virtually nothing compared to paypal", etc, etc..

When I was introduced to bitcoin, the pitch didn't even mention fees.  When I pitch bitcoin, I only talk about fees when asked.

That's you.  You think of the transaction fees go way up Bitcoin is going to still be as attractive?  You've lost your mind.  Transaction fees play a HUGE role.

Quote
Anyway, it seems you are claiming that Bitcoin has no value other than lower fees and will die without them.  Can you explain why decentralized control, potential privacy, and censorship resistance are not worth anything?


Okay now you're just talking nonsense.  I never said those other points are not worth anything.

notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1002


View Profile
July 15, 2013, 08:34:31 PM
 #9954

Oh really?  Because anytime I have EVER heard of Bitcoin being presented to newcomers is "low transactions fees!", "virtually nothing compared to paypal", etc, etc..

When I was introduced to bitcoin, the pitch didn't even mention fees.  When I pitch bitcoin, I only talk about fees when asked.

That's you.  You think of the transaction fees go way up Bitcoin is going to still be as attractive?  You've lost your mind.  Transaction fees play a HUGE role.

Quote
Anyway, it seems you are claiming that Bitcoin has no value other than lower fees and will die without them.  Can you explain why decentralized control, potential privacy, and censorship resistance are not worth anything?


Okay now you're just talking nonsense.  I never said those other points are not worth anything.

You said it would die with higher fees.  In my opinion, those other features make bitcoin transactions worth MORE than fiat transactions.

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
VolanicEruptor
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 250



View Profile
July 15, 2013, 08:43:01 PM
 #9955

Oh really?  Because anytime I have EVER heard of Bitcoin being presented to newcomers is "low transactions fees!", "virtually nothing compared to paypal", etc, etc..

When I was introduced to bitcoin, the pitch didn't even mention fees.  When I pitch bitcoin, I only talk about fees when asked.

That's you.  You think of the transaction fees go way up Bitcoin is going to still be as attractive?  You've lost your mind.  Transaction fees play a HUGE role.

Quote
Anyway, it seems you are claiming that Bitcoin has no value other than lower fees and will die without them.  Can you explain why decentralized control, potential privacy, and censorship resistance are not worth anything?


Okay now you're just talking nonsense.  I never said those other points are not worth anything.


You said it would die with higher fees.  In my opinion, those other features make bitcoin transactions worth MORE than fiat transactions.


Right, because the miners are more important than the people actually using the currency.   Roll Eyes
Come on, man.  You know as well as I do that that's not true.. nobody is going to want to use Bitcoin as a currency if they pay the same fees as banking, and ESPECIALLY if those fees are the same or more than Paypal. 

fumble
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 35
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 15, 2013, 08:46:34 PM
 #9956

So let's say someone decided to mine a huge portion of the network, such as Friedcat does.  Then they get paid by someone who wants to destroy Bitcoin to deliberately slow their latency down so that they are able to solve blocks with a very minimal amount of transactions.  

You get a few people doing this, and it would destroy Bitcoin.

Much more creative than a 51% attack..

It would not destroy bitcoin.  It would drive up transaction fees until either not including them is too expensive or more honest miners come online.

driving up transaction fees could destroy Bitcoin as an alternate currency, seeing as how low transaction fees is supposed to be one of it's strongest points.

I don't see low transaction fees as among it's strongest features.  More important are decentralized control, potential privacy, and censorship resistance.  In fact these features provide the business case for paying more for transactions than with fiat based systems.  Lower fees are just a nicety of the current economics.

I strongly disagree.  As a merchant paying 1.75% to 3% for credit card transactions (100's everyday) it adds up.
notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1002


View Profile
July 15, 2013, 08:48:20 PM
 #9957

Oh really?  Because anytime I have EVER heard of Bitcoin being presented to newcomers is "low transactions fees!", "virtually nothing compared to paypal", etc, etc..

When I was introduced to bitcoin, the pitch didn't even mention fees.  When I pitch bitcoin, I only talk about fees when asked.

That's you.  You think of the transaction fees go way up Bitcoin is going to still be as attractive?  You've lost your mind.  Transaction fees play a HUGE role.

Quote
Anyway, it seems you are claiming that Bitcoin has no value other than lower fees and will die without them.  Can you explain why decentralized control, potential privacy, and censorship resistance are not worth anything?


Okay now you're just talking nonsense.  I never said those other points are not worth anything.


You said it would die with higher fees.  In my opinion, those other features make bitcoin transactions worth MORE than fiat transactions.


Right, because the miners are more important than the people actually using the currency.   Roll Eyes

Which orifice did you pull that from?  I certainly didn't say it.

Quote
Come on, man.  You know as well as I do that that's not true.. nobody is going to want to use Bitcoin as a currency if they pay the same fees as banking, and ESPECIALLY if those fees are the same or more than Paypal. 

Except in the 30+ countries in the world that PayPal isn't allowed to service because of the overreach of the US Gov.

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
freedomno1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1806
Merit: 1090


Learning the troll avoidance button :)


View Profile
July 15, 2013, 09:10:51 PM
 #9958

Transaction fees is a very long term issue

However I am curious on the difference between AM blocks and non AM blocks as well that is a good shareholder question

If I recall the bitcoin wiki had an answer to this question somewhere.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses

Spamming transactions
It is easy to send transactions to yourself repeatedly. If these transactions fill blocks to the maximum size (1MB), other transactions would be delayed until the next block.
This is made expensive by the fees that would be required after the 50KB of free transactions per block are exhausted. An attacker will eventually eliminate free transactions, but Bitcoin fees will always be low because raising fees above 0.01 BTC per KB would require spending transaction fees. An attacker will eventually run out of money. Even if an attacker wants to waste money, transactions are further prioritized by the time since the coins were last spent, so attacks spending the same coins repeatedly are less effective

Believing in Bitcoins and it's ability to change the world
Elokane
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 817
Merit: 1000


Truth is a consensus among neurons www.synereo.com


View Profile WWW
July 15, 2013, 09:42:56 PM
 #9959

If I understand correctly,

Can I buy (let's say) 20 shares of AM-PT on BTCT, and then transfer all of them immediately to be direct shares by asking burnside? (And then again once per month?)

Anyone?

Synereo: liberating the Internet from abusive business models.

Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master.
<br>
TsuyokuNaritai
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 574
Merit: 500



View Profile
July 15, 2013, 09:47:25 PM
 #9960

Anyone?

Canth responded to your question.

Yes, but give it 3-4 days for the transfer to take place. Friedcat only does transfers 2x a week, so have a bit of patience.

Pages: « 1 ... 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 [498] 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 ... 1348 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!