1000000+ entries in 0.791s
mircea_popescu: you watch new york return a full complement of
teapartiers for
the senate.
smickles: mircea_popescu: oh, not
the case?
mircea_popescu: Diablo-D3 here, power crews from out of state are
trying
to come work in ny.
they're
turned away BECAUSE
THEYRE NOT UNION
dub: smickles: im sure
this would factor in
to any decision
mircea_popescu: sure, eligius has all
the promise of becoming a fortified compound in utah
dub: smickles:
true and he has a lot of mining support which is scary
smickles: Lu e-jr has
the crazy
to
try anything he sets his mind
to
tho
dub: anyway, as far a business decision goes its madness
to even contemplate
mircea_popescu: anyway, i don't
think
the devs have either
the balls or
the peabrains
to actually go ahead with algo change
dub: there would be no official client,
there isnt really now,
theres a reference client
BTC-Mining: eh,
that's actually right. But if
there's major change,
the official client might need
to apply new rules for
transactions different from
the current
dub: imo at
that point bitcoin is dead
BTC-Mining: That would be a problem if
they push it as
the official client... who controls bitcoin.org?
BTC-Mining: One chain with regular users, and one with 100% with
their own new rules...
mircea_popescu: and so
the devthreat
to change algo only has
the merit of
the interest of gpu miners, who are doomed anyway
BTC-Mining: If
that "51%+" has incompatible rules...
then we get a split no?
mircea_popescu: in
the context we;'re discussing 51% simply means
the majority decides by what rules
the chains are built.
mircea_popescu: BTC-Mining
that's a different 51% attack you're
thinking of.
dub: chicked feed compared
to
tooling up for asic production
mircea_popescu: this is
the old anti-dictator argument. i'm just rehashing roman republicanism here.
dub: BTC-Mining:
there is functionally nothing
to be gained from actually using a 51%
BTC-Mining: We're already waiting for 6 confirmations for big deposits EXACTLY for
the 51% attack...
dub: in
the long run maybe
BTC-Mining: The risk lessens of
this with each confirmation as
the computational advantage
the attacker needs grows
to a mathematically improbable level and six confirmations is widely accepted as being
the amount where
the
transaction is secure from
this attack.
BTC-Mining: control
the potential exists for
this double spend even if
the
transaction had already seen confirmations as
those blocks could be overtaken in
the attack.
BTC-Mining: A miner or cartel who controls more
than fifty percent of
the hashing capacity of
the bitcoin mining network has
the potential
to fraudulently double-spend recent
transactions. With majority of hashing power
the attacker has
the
technical ability
to mine blocks which do not include a previous spend
transactions from
the miner but instead include a double spend of
the coin. With majority
mircea_popescu: not because
they're bad people, but bcause we don't want any respected people.
smickles: the devs swithcing algos would easily be seen as anti-freemarket, and people might abandon
them over
that
mircea_popescu: the only value of btc rests on
the fact
that nobody can actually matter.
dub: I don't
think it even matters, an algo war will devalue btc as smickles said
dub: im not sure how you figure
they are
toothless,
they have
the majority
mircea_popescu: nobody cares about
the
toothless
threats of some pasty-chested "devs".
dub: point is
threat is enough, asic costs a lot
to develop
mircea_popescu: the EXACT system
that's
the problem with politics in
the us, and
the EXACT reason we can't use fucken fiat anymore.
mircea_popescu: patrickharnett is in default, i have
to say it. if i don't say it nobody does. buddy-buddy
mircea_popescu: clearly displayed in
the "let's stick
together" around pirate.
dub: mircea_popescu: I agree
that
the current mining cabal is dangerous
mircea_popescu: in my eyes
the only
thing
that will ever devalue btc is agreement.
mircea_popescu: in a sense
the current dev + gpu miner pools are creating
that problem as it is
dub: surefire way
to do
that is create a 51% problem
dub: the only problem
taht could arise is
they fuck it up
mircea_popescu: once
the diff is high enough
they'll ship
to lock in
the payments and avoid refunds
dub: probably
take years for
the failed bitcoin experiment memory
to die however
mircea_popescu: but anyway.
the shipping problem is
that companies don't have an incentive
to ship for as long as what
they're shipping is worth more
than what
the people paid for it.
dub: nearly identical
thing would rise
to replace it
mircea_popescu: bitcoin won't die just because some old boy's club
tries
to keep newcomers out
smickles: interesting
times ahead, anyway
dub: but I believe
they could effect
this
dub: I have no love for
the devs
mircea_popescu: what, you
think where
the crowd of 5000 atlas sockpuppets lies matters ?
dub: in what way can dev be prevented from algo swap if
they have mining majority?
dub: asic vendor will not risk
this
mircea_popescu: if bitcoin allowed
them any advantage because of some such crap it'd be doomed anyway
dub: mircea_popescu: once important incentive, devs have promised an algo swap if
they dont
smickles: mircea_popescu:
the must plan
to mine like hell as 'testing' untill
their actions raise
the diff significantly,
then ship
mircea_popescu: so likely
they will ship
the entire backlog simultaneously
smickles: BTC-Mining: you've noticed price rised laggin on diff increases
too?
mircea_popescu: smickles
this is actually a very interesting problem.
the companies have no real incentive
to ship
smickles: the first person with
the first asic on
that first diff period will make a lot of btc, relatively
BTC-Mining: I'd usually expect
the difficulty
to raise so
that profit on current equipment prices is in
the 1-3% weekly range
mircea_popescu: i for one don't
think
there's going
to be asics in 2012
BTC-Mining: Not sure difficulty will raise
that much
tho
dub: plenty of speculation
that mass GPU dieback occurs on reward half
smickles: heh, i'm just glad i got
to
type lognormal
dub: also its pointless
to do it either way :)
smickles: so why do
the calc assuming it stays flat?
smickles: yeah, but i expect it
to rise over
time
BTC-Mining: 137 days break even with
the SC actually
smickles: thing is,
the diff won't stay 30m for 65 days
dub: yeah, at least make your bullshit graphs face
teh right direction
smickles: 65 days?
that's
the fudged #, right?
dub: back of
the napkin I would say 'pulled directly out of his small intestine' more accurate
dub: fudged I
think is being kind