05-18 23:04 - 'Supercomputers across Europe have fallen to cryptomining hacks. I know they were mining monero but I wanted to see if someone here can tell me if this affected the hashrate. Where would I find graphs about monero?' (engadget.com) by /u/seanboxx removed from /r/Bitcoin within 6-16min
08-03 20:24 - '[quote] Absolutely true. / / But sadly, people are academically/financially/economically wrong about the "name". See the graph [here]. Let K1 and K2 be the mining power for the core chain and the cash chain. My coins a...' by /u/LucSr removed from /r/Bitcoin within 0-8min
So the only security in crypto is the hash rate with proof of work. Every single crypto that a) has less hash rate than Bitcoin and b) is not gaining hash rate over Bitcoin over time, is inferior. Not due to "it's Bitcoin" but because of proof of work and math and logic. Nothing to do with the name, just that everyone is trusting it more.
Absolutely true. But sadly, people are academically/financially/economically wrong about the "name". See the graph [here]1 . Let K1 and K2 be the mining power for the core chain and the cash chain. My coins are recorded in all chains and therefore enjoy the proof-of-work of K1 + K2, more than the coins only recorded in core chain whose currency code is BTCC on the graph, as well as more than the coins only recorded in cash chain whose currency code is BCH on the graph. There is no reason for any specific chain to be technically superior forever. In my benefit and interest, my coins shall have the currency code BTC just like the old days and what people currently think the coins of the name BTC is genuinely BTCC or whatever else. ''' Context Link Go1dfish undelete link unreddit undelete link Author: LucSr 1: np.r**di*.c*m/r*nonc**so*ed_*i*coin/co*m*n*s/cla*4n/price_of_bt*_around_*0*7_***it* Unknown links are censored to prevent spreading illicit content.
P2Pcash means no middlemen that you need to have faith in. I only need to trust the network. Because I know at least 1 miner will eventually mine my transaction and spread to the whole network. Because of a near complete graph in bitcoin network.
Bitcoinium Android app (previously known as VirtEx Bitcoin). Monitor BTC Price on MtGox and VirtEx. Includes: Widget, Price Alarm (via Notifications), Price Graph, Orderbook, Deepbit Mining stats. *Now Open Source* (free ad-supported version in comments)
03-08 21:07 - 'OK, I found some other graphs, looks like Bitcoin Unlimited is increasing in mining power. While adoption of SegWit for miners is stalled: / [link]' by /u/SilentLennie removed from /r/Bitcoin within 1-6min
''' OK, I found some other graphs, looks like Bitcoin Unlimited is increasing in mining power. While adoption of SegWit for miners is stalled: [link]1 ''' Context Link Go1dfish undelete link unreddit undelete link Author: SilentLennie 1: nodeco**te*.**m/gra*h*.ph*#bi*coin_cl*ssic*b*ocks Unknown links are censored to prevent spreading illicit content.
P2Pcash means no middlemen that you need to have faith in. I only need to trust the network. Because I know at least 1 miner will eventually mine my transaction and spread to the whole network. Because of a near complete graph in bitcoin network. /r/btc
Putting $400M of Bitcoin on your company balance sheet
Also posted on my blog as usual. Read it there if you can, there are footnotes and inlined plots. A couple of months ago, MicroStrategy (MSTR) had a spare $400M of cash which it decided to shift to Bitcoin (BTC). Today we'll discuss in excrutiating detail why this is not a good idea. When a company has a pile of spare money it doesn't know what to do with, it'll normally do buybacks or start paying dividends. That gives the money back to the shareholders, and from an economic perspective the money can get better invested in other more promising companies. If you have a huge pile of of cash, you probably should be doing other things than leave it in a bank account to gather dust. However, this statement from MicroStrategy CEO Michael Saylor exists to make it clear he's buying into BTC for all the wrong reasons:
“This is not a speculation, nor is it a hedge. This was a deliberate corporate strategy to adopt a bitcoin standard.”
Let's unpack it and jump into the economics Bitcoin:
Is Bitcoin money?
No. Or rather BTC doesn't act as money and there's no serious future path for BTC to become a form of money. Let's go back to basics. There are 3 main economic problems money solves: 1. Medium of Exchange. Before money we had to barter, which led to the double coincidence of wants problem. When everyone accepts the same money you can buy something from someone even if they don't like the stuff you own. As a medium of exchange, BTC is not good. There are significant transaction fees and transaction waiting times built-in to BTC and these worsen the more popular BTC get. You can test BTC's usefulness as a medium of exchange for yourself right now: try to order a pizza or to buy a random item with BTC. How many additional hurdles do you have to go through? How many fewer options do you have than if you used a regular currency? How much overhead (time, fees) is there? 2. Unit of Account. A unit of account is what you compare the value of objects against. We denominate BTC in terms of how many USD they're worth, so BTC is a unit of account presently. We can say it's because of lack of adoption, but really it's also because the market value of BTC is so volatile. If I buy a $1000 table today or in 2017, it's roughly a $1000 table. We can't say that a 0.4BTC table was a 0.4BTC table in 2017. We'll expand on this in the next point: 3. Store of Value. When you create economic value, you don't want to be forced to use up the value you created right away. For instance, if I fix your washing machine and you pay me in avocados, I'd be annoyed. I'd have to consume my payment before it becomes brown, squishy and disgusting. Avocado fruit is not good money because avocadoes loses value very fast. On the other hand, well-run currencies like the USD, GBP, CAD, EUR, etc. all lose their value at a low and most importantly fairly predictible rate. Let's look at the chart of the USD against BTC While the dollar loses value at a predictible rate, BTC is all over the place, which is bad. One important use money is to write loan contracts. Loans are great. They let people spend now against their future potential earnings, so they can buy houses or start businesses without first saving up for a decade. Loans are good for the economy. If you want to sign something that says "I owe you this much for that much time" then you need to be able to roughly predict the value of the debt in at the point in time where it's due. Otherwise you'll have a hard time pricing the risk of the loan effectively. This means that you need to charge higher interests. The risk of making a loan in BTC needs to be priced into the interest of a BTC-denominated loan, which means much higher interest rates. High interests on loans are bad, because buying houses and starting businesses are good things.
BTC has a fixed supply, so these problems are built in
Some people think that going back to a standard where our money was denominated by a stock of gold (the Gold Standard) would solve economic problems. This is nonsense. Having control over supply of your currency is a good thing, as long as it's well run. See here Remember that what is desirable is low variance in the value, not the value itself. When there are wild fluctuations in value, it's hard for money to do its job well. Since the 1970s, the USD has been a fiat money with no intrinsic value. This means we control the supply of money. Let's look at a classic poorly drawn econ101 graph The market price for USD is where supply meets demand. The problem with a currency based on an item whose supply is fixed is that the price will necessarily fluctuate in response to changes in demand. Imagine, if you will, that a pandemic strikes and that the demand for currency takes a sharp drop. The US imports less, people don't buy anything anymore, etc. If you can't print money, you get deflation, which is worsens everything. On the other hand, if you can make the money printers go brrrr you can stabilize the price Having your currency be based on a fixed supply isn't just bad because in/deflation is hard to control. It's also a national security risk... The story of the guy who crashed gold prices in North Africa In the 1200s, Mansa Munsa, the emperor of the Mali, was rich and a devout Muslim and wanted everyone to know it. So he embarked on a pilgrimage to make it rain all the way to Mecca. He in fact made it rain so hard he increased the overall supply of gold and unintentionally crashed gold prices in Cairo by 20%, wreaking an economic havoc in North Africa that lasted a decade. This story is fun, the larger point that having your inflation be at the mercy of foreign nations is an undesirable attribute in any currency. The US likes to call some countries currency manipulators, but this problem would be serious under a gold standard.
Currencies are based on trust
Since the USD is based on nothing except the US government's word, how can we trust USD not to be mismanaged? The answer is that you can probably trust the fed until political stooges get put in place. Currently, the US's central bank managing the USD, the Federal Reserve (the Fed for friends & family), has administrative authority. The fed can say "no" to dumb requests from the president. People who have no idea what the fed does like to chant "audit the fed", but the fed is already one of the best audited US federal entities. The transcripts of all their meetings are out in the open. As is their balance sheet, what they plan to do and why. If the US should audit anything it's the Department of Defense which operates without any accounting at all. It's easy to see when a central bank will go rogue: it's when political yes-men are elected to the board. For example, before printing themselves into hyperinflation, the Venezuelan president appointed a sociologist who publicly stated “Inflation does not exist in real life” and instead is a made up capitalist lie. Note what happened mere months after his gaining control over the Venezuelan currency This is a key policy. One paper I really like, Sargent (1984) "The end of 4 big inflations" states:
The essential measures that ended hyperinflation in each of Germany,Austria, Hungary, and Poland were, first, the creation of an independentcentral bank that was legally committed to refuse the government'sdemand or additional unsecured credit and, second, a simultaneousalteration in the fiscal policy regime.
In english: *hyperinflation stops when the central bank can say "no" to the government." The US Fed, like other well good central banks, is run by a bunch of nerds. When it prints money, even as aggressively as it has it does so for good reasons. You can see why they started printing on March 15th as the COVID lockdowns started:
The Federal Reserve is prepared to use its full range of tools to support the flow of credit to households and businesses and thereby promote its maximum employment and price stability goals.
In english: We're going to keep printing and lowering rates until jobs are back and inflation is under control. If we print until the sun is blotted out, we'll print in the shade.
BTC is not gold
Gold is a good asset for doomsday-preppers. If society crashes, gold will still have value. How do we know that? Gold has held value throughout multiple historic catastrophes over thousands of years. It had value before and after the Bronze Age Collapse, the Fall of the Western Roman Empire and Gengis Khan being Gengis Khan. Even if you erased humanity and started over, the new humans would still find gold to be economically valuable. When Europeans d̶i̶s̶c̶o̶v̶e̶r̶e̶d̶ c̶o̶n̶q̶u̶e̶r̶e̶d̶ g̶e̶n̶o̶c̶i̶d̶e̶d̶ went to America, they found gold to be an important item over there too. This is about equivalent to finding humans on Alpha-Centauri and learning that they think gold is a good store of value as well. Some people are puzzled at this: we don't even use gold for much! But it has great properties: First, gold is hard to fake and impossible to manufacture. This makes it good to ascertain payment. Second, gold doesnt react to oxygen, so it doesn't rust or tarnish. So it keeps value over time unlike most other materials. Last, gold is pretty. This might sound frivolous, and you may not like it, but jewelry has actual value to humans. It's no coincidence if you look at a list of the wealthiest families, a large number of them trade in luxury goods. To paraphrase Veblen humans have a profound desire to signal social status, for the same reason peacocks have unwieldy tails. Gold is a great way to achieve that. On the other hand, BTC lacks all these attributes. Its value is largely based on common perception of value. There are a few fundamental drivers of demand:
Means of Exchange: if people seriously start using BTC to buy pizzas, then this creates a real demand for the currency to accomplish the short-term exchanges. As we saw previously, I'm not personally sold on this one and it's currently a negligible fraction of overall demand.
Criminal uses: Probably the largest inbuilt advantage of BTC is that it's anonymous, and so a great way to launder money. Hacker gangs use BTC to demand ransom on cryptolocker type attacks because it's a shared way for an honest company to pay and for the criminals to receive money without going to jail.
Apart from these, it's hard to argue that BTC will retain value throughout some sort of economic catastrophe.
BTC is really risky
One last statement from Michael Saylor I take offense to is this:
“We feel pretty confident that Bitcoin is less risky than holding cash, less risky than holding gold,” MicroStrategy CEO said in an interview
"BTC is less risky than holding cash or gold long term" is nonsense. We saw before that BTC is more volatile on face value, and that as long as the Fed isn't run by spider monkeys stacked in a trench coat, the inflation is likely to be within reasonable bounds. But on top of this, BTC has Abrupt downside risks that normal currencies don't. Let's imagine a few:
A critical software vulnerability is found in the BTC codebase, leading to a possible exploitation.
Xi Jinping decides he's had enough of rich people in China hiding their assets from him and bans BTC.
Some form of bank run takes hold for whatever reason. Because BTC wallets are uninsured, unlike regular banks, this compounds into a Black Tuesday style crash.
Blockchain solutions are fundamentally inefficient
Blockchain was a genius idea. I still marvel at the initial white paper which is a great mix of economics and computer science. That said, blockchain solutions make large tradeoffs in design because they assume almost no trust between parties. This leads to intentionally wasteful designs on a massive scale. The main problem is that all transactions have to be validated by expensive computational operations and double checked by multiple parties. This means waste:
BTC was estimated to use as much electricity as Belgium in 2019. It's hard to trace where the BTC mining comes from, but we can assume it has a huge carbon footprint.
A single transactions is necessarily expensive. A single transaction takes as much electricity as 800,000 VISA transactions, or watching 50,000 hours of youtube videos.
There is a large necessary tax on the transaction, since those checking the transaction extract a few BTC from it to be incentivized to do the work of checking it.
Many design problems can be mitigated by various improvements over BTC, but it remains that a simple database always works better than a blockchain if you can trust the parties to the transaction.
Bitcoin mentioned around Reddit: A good article (not mine) on understanding BlockChain (bitcoin) vs the Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) (IOTA). It’s important to know about this as we move beyond blockchain and into the future 😇 /r/Iota
I want to optimize your program on a ppc64el-supercomputer with lots of Tesla V100-SXM2 GPUs for free
I've been working on a program to automatically adjust hyperparameters in a given range. That is things like number of neurons, number of layers etc. For this, I want to do this on real programs with real data that is actually useful. I've tried things like DeepSpeech, but I have immense problems getting it to work on a ppc64el-environment with some compiled dependencies. This will then be made into a paper. So, I'd like to offer the following. If you have an application you'd like to be trained on a high performance computing cluster with hundreds of Tesla V100-SXM2 GPUS, for free!, than you can write me your suggestions here. The following requirements must be met though: - It has to be able to run on ppc64el Linux natively (i.e. you compiled it for it or it's only python and bash) - It has to be free software (and legal, of course) - No bitcoin mining or things like that - Has to be a real world application with lots of data that is either freely accessible or you can give me a download link for - The program needs to accept the parameters via a cli (i.e. "program.py --layers=10") - There has to be a loss function that can be minimized (e.g. the number of errors made, or quadratic loss or whatever, only thing that matters is one number and lower meaning better) - The result needs to be publically available, too. I have as much parallel computing time as we need and can automatically try as many combination as we want until we have a good result. RAM is not an issue, I have about 440GB RAM on a node, and more than 30 nodes with 6 Teslas each. I'd really be interested in good suggestions, from which I will chose one or maybe two. You'll also get fancy graphs of the GPU workload over time, and of the hyperparameter sets tried out. Anyone interested?
Minimum Viable Issuance - Why Ethereum’s lack of a hard cap on ETH issuance is a good thing.
This post will explain how the argument used by the average Bitcoin maximalist, thinking that they have found Ethereum’s achilles heel when talking about issuance is actually highlighting one of Ethereum’s strong points and one of the main threats to the longevity of the Bitcoin network. So first let’s answer the question which I know many people have about Ethereum:
What is Ethereum’s ETH issuance schedule?
Ethereum has an issuance policy of Minimum Viable Issuance. So what does this mean exactly? It means that the issuance of ETH will be as low as possible while also maintaining a sufficient budget to pay miners (and soon to be stakers) to keep the network secure. For example, if ETH issuance was halved, miners would drop off the network and stop mining as it is no longer profitable for them to mine. As a result, the network would be less secure as it would cost less money for an attacker to control 51% of the hash power and attack the network. This means that the Ethereum community plans to change ETH issuance as time goes on to maintain a reasonable security budget which will keep the network secure but will also keep inflation in check. We have done this twice in the past with EIP-649 and EIP-1234 which reduced block rewards from 5 ETH per block to 3 ETH and from 3 ETH to 2 ETH respectively. I previously made a graph of ETH issuance over time here: https://redd.it/it8ce7 So while Ethereum doesn’t have a strictly defined issuance schedule, the community will reject any proposals which either put the security of the network at risk such as the recent EIP-2878, or we will reject proposals which will lead to excessive network security and therefore an unnecessarily high inflation rate (or we will accept proposals which reduce issuance after price rises and therefore the security budget rises). This means that when Bitcoiners accuse the Ethereum Foundation of being no better than a central bank because they can “print more Ether”, this is completely untrue. Any proposals made by the EF which would increase issuance unnecessarily would be rejected by the community in the same way that a proposal to increase the supply of Bitcoin from 21 million to 22 million would be rejected. There is a social contract around both Bitcoin’s and Ethereum’s issuance schedules. Any networks or proposals which break the social contracts of 21 million Bitcoins and minimal viable issuance of Ether would be a breach of these contracts and the new proposed network would be labeled by the community as illegitimate and the original network would live on.
So why is minimum viable issuance better than a hard cap?
Minimum viable issuance is better than a hard cap because it puts the most important part of the network first - the security. MVI ensures that the Ethereum network will always have a security budget which keeps the cost of a 51% attack impractically high. Bitcoin on the other hand, halves its security budget every 4 years until eventually only the transaction fees pay for network security. This means that every 4 years, the amount of money paying for network security halves until eventually, the value of attacking the network becomes greater than the security budget and someone performs a 51% attack (technically the security budget only halves if terms of BTC not in dollars. However, even if the price of Bitcoin more than doubles in the time that the security budget halves, the ratio of security budget to value secured on the network still halves, doubling the financial viability of performing a network attack). The strategy to pay for the security budget once Bitcoin issuance stops is for transaction fees to secure the network since transaction fees are paid to miners. Not only does this have its own security problems which I won’t detail here, but unless Bitcoin scales on layer 1 (layer 2 scaling solutions have their own security mechanisms separate from L1), then fees would have to cost well in the thousands of dollars to secure a trillion dollar market cap Bitcoin that is secured by nothing but fees. If Bitcoin maximalists want a 10 trillion or 100 trillion dollar market cap then expect fees to go up another 10 or 100 times from there. Ethereum on the other hand, will be able to keep its network secure with approximately 1-2% annual issuance being paid to stakers under ETH 2.0. This is because not all of the network will be staking, so if 33 million of the approximately 110 million Ether in existence stakes under ETH 2.0, then paying this 33 million Ether 6% a year (a very decent yield!) would cost just under 2 million ETH per year which would equate to less than 2% annual ETH inflation. This is also before considering EIP-1559 which will burn a portion of transaction fees which will counter the effect of this inflation and potentially even make ETH deflationary if the sum of all burned transaction fees are greater than the annual inflation. Also, under ETH 2.0, an attacker performing a 51% attack would get his funds slashed (they would lose their funds) if they attack the network, meaning that they can only perform a 51% attack once. However, in Bitcoin, anyone who controls 51% of the mining hash power could perform multiple 51% attacks without losing everything like they could in ETH 2.0. So in conclusion, while Ethereum doesn’t have the guaranteed anti-inflation security of a hard cap, it does have the guarantee of always paying it’s miners (or stakers under ETH 2.0) enough to keep the network secure. In contrast, while Bitcoin’s social contract may guarantee a hard cap of 21 million, it cannot simultaneously guarantee network security in the long run. Eventually, its users will have to decide if they want a secure network with more than 21 million coins or a tax to pay for security or an insecure network with super high fees and a hard cap of 21 million Bitcoin. Disclaimer:The details I covered around 51% attacks and network security are simplified. I am not an expert in this field and things are a lot more nuanced than I laid out in my simplifications above.
DigiByte Mining Pool - Official Launch - 50,000 DGB Giveaway!
https://preview.redd.it/1hlax7cksas51.png?width=2000&format=png&auto=webp&s=6893e01650cfdd3a778df5705a0382ad8b382488 I have been working hard on the front-end of my pool for the past couple of months. Anyone who saw v1.0 will be shocked to see the progress it's made. It now has a fantastic front-end with detailed charts, graphs, and user stats, all in a sleek Bootstrap 4.0 layout. Miners....come join us at https://Luckyblocks.ninja I wanted to offer support for all Algo's, and initially, I did. But after talking with DigiByte developers, and taking their advice this was changed to support only Scrypt and SHA256D. Until ProgPOW is implemented GPU mining is pointless, so this ultimately is why I chose Scrypt and SHA256D. Another feature of the pool is BTC and LTC Solo Mining for any of you guys out there that have some gear that's not profitable to mine with anymore and just want to play the blockchain lottery. Wouldn't it be nice to wake up with 6.25 Bitcoin in your wallet one morning? General Pool Features are:
The Bitcoin.com mining pool has the lowest share reject rate (0.15%) we've ever seen. Other pools have over 0.30% rejected shares. Furthermore, the Bitcoin.com pool has a super responsive and reliable support team. Bitcoin-Mining ist ein Geschäft mit einer sehr grossen Konkurrenz. Mining macht nur Sinn, wenn Sie es aus Spass machen und es Ihnen nicht so wichtig ist, ob Sie Profit daraus schlagen. Es ist aber auch möglich, dass Sie es sehr effektiv betreiben und davon profitieren. Bitcoin $ 13,130.78 13,130.78. BTC 0.09 %. Ethereum $ 394.78 ETH-3.33 % How Bitcoin Mining Works. Where do bitcoins come from? With paper money, a government decides when to print and distribute money. Bitcoin doesn't have a central government. With Bitcoin, miners use special software to solve math problems and are issued a certain number of bitcoins in exchange. This provides a smart way to issue the currency and also creates an incentive for more people to mine ... Um Bitcoin Mining zu betreiben, müssen Sie einem Miningpool beitreten, was zusätzliche Kosten verursacht. Für das Mining benötigen Sie entsprechende Hardware. Auch hier kommen Kosten auf Sie zu. Je nachdem, wie leistungsfähig Ihr Bitcoin Miner sein soll, zahlen Sie bis zu 2.000 Euro. Es ist nicht bekannt, ob sich Mining auch in Zukunft noch lohnen wird. Wenn Sie nicht genau wissen, was ...
How to start BITCOIN mining using GPU or CPU in 2020 ...
Best Graphics Cards for BITCOIN mining Must watch Tech Mechanic. Loading... Unsubscribe from Tech Mechanic? Cancel Unsubscribe. Working... Subscribe Subscribed Unsubscribe 8.76K. Loading ... Do you have any horror stories from ex-mining cards that you've purchased? Any recommendations for making sure you're buying a card that won't explode on you... What do you need to mine one Bitcoin BTC coin in 2020? Let's review Bitcoin mining profitability and what BTC mining rigs you would need to mine an entire co... Graphics card stock has long been tapped out due to cryptocurrency miners, but does what they're doing make any sense? Let's find out. Sign up for Crunchyrol... Twitch: http://www.twitch.tv/veritas Discord: http://www.discord.gg/veritaswtf Twitter: http://twitter.com/veriitasgames Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/...