/biz/ - Business & Finance

MFW I still don't know what a hashrate is or how bitcoin works.

>>11509668
can you stop posting shit like this anon? dont we want some more dumpage to buy back in?

>>11509668
quadruple top, strong resistance at 60,000,000 TH. Entering a 100x short position, taking profits after November BCH hardfork

>>11509682
Same
90% of my networth is in crypto, but I have no clue
Fight me

>>11509668
this basically means that more miners have entered the mix since the january dump, which is a good thing

>muh miners arent profitable so they're closing up shop
>in reality btc is gaining more popularity and development but is not reflected on the price

>>11509706
BCHGANG.

>>11509701
kek, literally no fucking idea what I threw my life savings into. Doesn't seem to matter. It just always goes up (after sometimes going down for a while)

>>11510024

Thats the stock market in a nutshell, lol.

>>11510024
hell yeah ignorance is bliss
I didn't bother to understand what blockchain means until after I cashed out close to 100k in crypto gains earlier this year.

>>11509668
more interestingly, hashrate is more stable now than before. Has equilibrium been found?

>>11509668
>oh its nothing as usual

It takes ages for ASICs to ship. The trend is leveling off now.

>>11510066
I don't know what a coin is, what bid ask spread means, what limit buy / sell are or how to wipe my arse. Early adopters baby yeah!

>>11509682

It gives you the rate at which hashes occur. More hashes is best.

>>11509682
>>11509701
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

before bitcoin there was something called liberty reserve and egold. these were centralized depositories that allowed p2p payment with virtual currency backed fully by gold. it was used in criminal activity or alleged to be and after it became well known it was shut down by authorities. even if governments weren't subordinate to a century old global money trust that now exerts its influence, such schemes as e-gold could have also failed to localized states of corruption (such as a robbery uninsured reserves, a hack, an exit scam, an unscrupulous employee embezzling, etc.)

bitcoin mining is the reason bitcoin is not able to be censored by governments, corporations, or individuals. mining itself is indistinguishable from an attack on bitcoin's cryptographic security framework. it is only when someone has 51% or more of the total hashpower that they could attack the underlying structure. this is exremely cost prohibitive, even to governments, and amassing an operation of the scale necessary would be a huge undertaking to keep quiet, rife with pitfalls of operatives becoming corrupt as we have seen in past cases involving government agents dealing with bitcoin and attempting to steal them for themselves. now, it is a chicken and the eqq question about whether bticoin is valuable because it has the most cost prohibitive mining, or whether it has so much mining behind it because it is the most valuable, but it's really a false dichotomy. the biggest risk is that over 51% of mining could be located in a single jurisdiction, identified, and raided at once to be taken over.

>>11511393
so next time you hear someone say bitcoin is the most valuable "because it was the original", make sure to explain that it's actually because we live in a world where power interests endeavor to fully control the administration of capital and use police power to violently dismantle any attempt to disintermediate their 100+ year old total control matrix on the administration of money. mining itself exactly resembles an attack on bitcoin's underlying cryptography, and because it is economically incentivized and scaled to its current level, it is cost prohibitive for the current power interests or any individual or organization to attack its underlying cryptography. the fact that it was the first is nice, and it definitely demonstates viability and reliability the longer it runs. the network effect and largest merchant adoption is also real. but mining is what keeps any individual from being able to shut bitcoin's operation down, which 100% as demonstrated by history would have already happened if this roadblock were not in place. mining is the bedrock of value in bitcoin

>>11509685
This will cause dumpage... cant you see the hashrate levelling out?

And why isn't the price going up? are people mining at a loss or is there another mining trick out

>>11511408
Amen insatoshla

>>11509682
network hashrate is the combined hashrate of all miners on the bitcoin network
the higher the hashrate, the higher the difficulty (which is adjusted every two weeks)
the higher the difficulty, the more difficult it is to mine bitcoin at a profit using the same hardware at the same electricity cost, going from a lower to a higher difficulty

basically, higher difficulty = increased mining costs, which—generally speaking—translates to increased market costs
my argument in favor of this is that, objectively speaking, if you want bitcoin, you either have to set up your own mining rigs, or you have to buy bitcoin for the going rate
at the moment, unless you live in one of the very, very few areas of the world where electricity costs are low enough to justify buying hardware and taking all the time to mine to get the amount of bitcoin that you want, it's far more feasible to buy it at the market rate

bottom line is, if you hold bitcoin and the difficulty goes up, this is a very good thing for you
i would argue that hashrate, and difficulty (which effectively doubles roughly every four years because of reward halvenings, regardless of hashrate) are the two major factors in pushing up bitcoin's price, and hashrate continues to climb significantly—even with crypto slipping on just a few hundred dozen or so banana peels on its way to the $100 trillion marketcap
volume matters, of course—but to argue that any fiat currency on earth is an objectively more desirable or intrinsically valuable asset than bitcoin or bitcoin cash is to make the argument that a relatively trustless currency that rewards miners for increasing the objective value of the network (especially in the case of BCH) is less desirable than centrally-controlled monopoly money

tl;dr - keep buying and holding bitcoin
but, really, you should buy and hold bitcoin cash too

>>11509692
we broke the 42,5k resistance in late july, we will break thsi resistance aswell.

>>11511408
so youre saying I should buy ETH?

>>11512064
eth is good yeah

>>11509682
Doesn’t matter as ‘price follows hashrate’ has been shown to be a total meme

>>11511408
>>11511393
>Oy Vey - that ID indicates talmudic meddling.

Best explanation ever though of the issues in a nutshell, listen to the Rabbi everyone.

>>11511408
based and redpilled

but when it comes to the rising hashrate I have a theory that maybe it's because bitcoin is not fungible and the new clean freshly mined coins trade at a premium? I heard rumors that big entities buy btc straight from the miners

>>11512064
I'd cost average into decred more than ETH. I always had a problem with how ETH handled the DAO hard fork. I understand it's unlikely such a thing could happen again but I hate to participate in something that has been irreparably tarnished in that manner (political hard fork related to a specific wealth shift incident and roll back of politically favored transactions at the expense of neutral immutability). that said LINK is my biggest non btc hold so I make do with the platform as it is now and will continue to do so to the extent I need to for other projects. ETH at this price seems like it could be an ok buy though. my problem with it could be too emotional from an investment standpoint (I do hold some, not nearly as much as I would if they hadn't hardforked to bailout the DAO, that decision did not help me financially, believe me, but I don't dwell on regrets because I know I'd do the same thing again in that situation if it were a different coin) There's a good chance that won't matter to enough people to prevent massive growth at some point. I really don't know, I hardly hear anyone ever mention it but it still bothers me a lot

>>11513022
interesting. the only issue I'd have with rumors like that is the logical issue of why large players would even be interested in buying bitcoin if its imperfect fungibility was such a big concern that they needed to go through the hassle of going to a mongolian hydropower plant to buy it, would they actually want to bother? it's fungible in all functional senses, just not from the standpoint of identification, similar to bank notes having serial numbers but obviously worse for privacy or risk of being provably discovered to be ""tainted" after purchase because of a permanent complete record of provenance. blacklists enforced by police have to be implemented for it to be a big problem, as well as precedence that regular people could unknowingly get in trouble for using tainted coins. if they were really that afraid of the fungibility problem, they might want to buy monero or avoid crypto. XMR is my biggest hold after LINK. definitely look into getting some at the current price. it is still truly in development stages with its bi-annual hard fork of hashing which I think hurts the short term price, but it's a unique approach to the mining centralization problem and nobody is even close when it comes to addressing the fungibility problem. the FUD you always hear is government ban. that's the biggest buy signal ever. i remember people telling me that so many times about bitcoin. it's like they don't realize the government knows that would be admitting an inability to deal with it and be a massive buy signal to the rest of the world

Buy chainlink sirs

this is the Decred hashrate. ~425x or 42,500% increase in a year, price is ~75% higher in the same time period in both sats and USD (kek, btc was very similar price a year ago as today). ASICs were introduced, but DCR has a unique ticket staking system with a market priced incentive to stake, with voting capabilities. this makes mining centralization less of a problem as a successful attack would also require gaining a large proportion of the circulating supply. in any case, you could sell and get very rich if there ever was a serious attempt to attack because the active trading float is likely far smaller than the amount of supply needed to conduct an attack. it is also in a sweet spot on its distribution curve, you still earn a full DCR for staking a ticket (cost is ~100 DCR currently and average stake time is a month) there is a 21 million hard cap. don't sleep on this one. I don't think it's going to dump just because binance listed it. it was really only on shapeshift and KYC exchanges for the past year, and before that when bittrex and poloniex didnt force KYC the market was way smaller. most coins on binance are easily front run but DCR is actually good and more people probably don't have it than your typical binance listing. it's still reasonable to be able to afford an amount that would let you buy a ticket and roll it over, and there have only been ~8.69 million of 21 million hard cap mined. this has the potential to go very very high in the wake of such a hashrate surge and at this spot in the distribution and with its history and the people surrounding it. it could end up being a truly better bitcoin and buying a ticket now could be like buying a dash masternode when it was still darkcoin

>>11513577
any other holds other than btc, decred and link?

what about zilliqa?

>>11513218
thanks for the thoughts.
That's just theory I heard but it would be difficult to enforce cause many coins have been mixed in big exchanges wallets so a good portion of the supply could be "tainted", probably just FUD but I heard people buying directly from miners so time will tell.

I hold link too, currently don't have a position in monero but I'll buy some sooner or later. btc/link/xmr is the only trio that ever interested me in this joke of a market

>>11509682
>>11509701

The hash rate usually goes up 10x in a given year because the technology gets better

You guys should probably stop talking about shit you don't know

>>11509701
this is a hash function (simplified)
f(x) = x^2
if you put in 9, you get 81...
9 is the secret guess, guessing = mining in bitcoin
the number 81 describes your block, it is a special identifier for your block. you cannot choose to use 80 or 82, no, you must use 81, because it describes every transaction that is in the block.

Now this hash-function is very simple. You can just take the square root of 81 to get the secret answer 9. but the hash-function used in bitcoin is a lot different, you cannot get 9 from 81, you must guess. you most guess many many many many many times... and when you guess correct you receive bitcoin as reward.
now, hashrate is simply how much everyone is guessing. high hashrate = many computers guessing a lot, low hashrate = not so many computer guessing

everyone respect you if you guess correct. they other computers thinks it is fair that you should get the reward because you guessed right. they don't have to trust you, they can verify that your guess is correct.

they can verify that you guessed correctly by putting in 9 in the function and getting back the answer 81. the hash-function is like a door that can only be opened from one side, you can never put in 81 and get 9.

this is a very simple explanation of how bitcoin works, but if you understand this, you understand more than most people and it is very simple.

>>11515719
(slightly more advanced)
what happens if two different computers guess correctly at the same time?

what happens is that the chain splits, it becomes a temporary "fork". in this moment there exists two bitcoin. the question is, which one should survive? the answer to that question is that the longest chain always survives (everyone knows this and agrees on this).

a 51% attack is when the chain splits and the two chains are kept alive, then one chain dies. the chain that dies is the one where the attacker sent "fake" bitcoin to somebody and that somebody gave something real back for it. that person has been scammed as that chain will die. it is double-spending.

it is called 51% attack but you need a lot more than 51% to do it successfully.