What is Cryptomining?

NightAntilli

Posts: 659   +822
Firstly, someone has to prove that Satoshi has ever existed. You have to "love" the new "progressive" currency where everything about its founders is a secret.
The technology exists and has been released by Satoshi Nakamoto. Satoshi Nakamoto definitely exists. The question is who it is or they are. It is unknown if it's one person or a group of people. The fact that the creator is anonymous is a strength, not a weakness.

Secondly, this is a tech that will introduce total financial surveillance over society. With cash, you can have some privacy. But with crypto, there's no privacy. And the most ridiculous thing is that crypto proponents claim that crypto offers privacy. That's such a shallow lie, but their believers are even shallower.
Crypto offers more privacy than banks and traditional finance, because even though the ledger is public in crypto and viewable by everyone, you still have to do the work to connect which address belongs to which person. And a person can have multiple addresses. So while banks can simply send your info to the government, if they want to track you in crypto, it requires actual resources to pull it off.
And above that, there's privacy coins like Monero, which are completely anonymous. If you're worried about privacy, use those. And there are multiple projects to do private transactions on non-private blockchains.
The more governments crack down on crypto, the more solutions will be brought forth.

Thirdly, the fact that governments (including those that exert maximum control over their population) are now racing each other to accept this tech, shows there's something wrong with it. Proving my second point.
Governments will try to compete with existing projects. But ultimately, this is going to be a failed endeavor. Governments are pretty much the slowest institutions in existence. A sloth looks like a supersonic fighter jet by comparison.
Governments lag behind in everything, and this space moves extremely quickly. Their biggest chance is to simply adopt the tech. VISA for one, has already adopted Ethereum, and PayPal has adopted multiple cryptocurrencies. They know their value, and they will not be left behind.

And don't confuse digital currencies with cryptocurrencies. Pretty much all fiat currencies around the world are already mostly digital.
 
I believe there is something fundamentally wrong with the banking system: as a Belgian economist explained our financial transaction system, it only takes 1 percent of all the people out there to withdraw their money from the bank, and the system in its totality will collapse. It might be that Cryptocurrency is an answer to this flaw but at the rate variants of it are popping up, they are indeed more of a plague and a way to somehow get a bit richer (or poorer if you are unlucky), but they actually do not really deserve the name 'currency'. Most shops don't accept them in the offline world except for maybe Bitcoins. So they are more of a gimmick to keep miners 'busy', and I actually believe as well they must be sponsored by graphics cards and electricity companies.
 

adamada72

Posts: 15   +9
The technology exists and has been released by Satoshi Nakamoto. Satoshi Nakamoto definitely exists. The question is who it is or they are. It is unknown if it's one person or a group of people. The fact that the creator is anonymous is a strength, not a weakness.


Crypto offers more privacy than banks and traditional finance, because even though the ledger is public in crypto and viewable by everyone, you still have to do the work to connect which address belongs to which person. And a person can have multiple addresses. So while banks can simply send your info to the government, if they want to track you in crypto, it requires actual resources to pull it off.
And above that, there's privacy coins like Monero, which are completely anonymous. If you're worried about privacy, use those. And there are multiple projects to do private transactions on non-private blockchains.
The more governments crack down on crypto, the more solutions will be brought forth.


Governments will try to compete with existing projects. But ultimately, this is going to be a failed endeavor. Governments are pretty much the slowest institutions in existence. A sloth looks like a supersonic fighter jet by comparison.
Governments lag behind in everything, and this space moves extremely quickly. Their biggest chance is to simply adopt the tech. VISA for one, has already adopted Ethereum, and PayPal has adopted multiple cryptocurrencies. They know their value, and they will not be left behind.

And don't confuse digital currencies with cryptocurrencies. Pretty much all fiat currencies around the world are already mostly digital.

You missed the point being made. Satoshi Nakamoto "a single person" is in fact not known to exist. That was the whole point. The spokesperson can't tell us anything because... we don't know, they've never come forward. Its like an unknown person you'll never meet is going to legally marry you, congratulations. Kind of see the issue. It's a bit odd for no reason.

Privacy: No you're missing the point again. Traditional banks take more work to piece everything together because it's a fragmented system at its root, even if you're not trying. To make the point lets think bigger and pretend were big time drug kings. We just got paid and need to do something with that cash, that's where money laundering comes in, you move the money around and divide it so much it's impossible to track. Done, our friends took a cut, some extra taxes were payed and bang we have real money to use anywhere. Good times, nobody can catch use, it's done. Contrast that with crypto. We have a ton of money and we move it into a privacy coin, great and lets do the same process, move it and divide it and now we get to use it... only there's a problem. If at any point in that chain someone connects a real person to that money at any future time in history the can start to backtrack what went where to who and how much. That privacy coin money is going to follow you forever and the more you use it the more the privacy coin feature is removed. The problem IS the block chain baked into it. Hope this helps :)

Governments: This one is easy and I've found nobody that can answer the question. How do governments exist when they only have crypto to spend? You see the issue is no government ever in all of time has kept it's accounting squared. In other words for a nice example last year a lot of people wanted gov money when they were out of work. Where did that money come from? From nothing is the answer and that doesn't happen in a crypto world as a feature. These two systems are like oil and water and crypto believers think something that's never happened before in human history is going to take place and then it gets murky how everything will work after that when I've asked. This vibe reminds me of hippies from the 70's in California. Big dreams from long ago. The boring answer is it's not, people are going to want the systems to be how they are now because sometimes it works for them (even if they complain). The biggest thing crypto has going for it right now is fomo which makes more fomo and higher prices. I do know one other thing proof of work is a road to nowhere and should just go away, bitcoin is a bad idea. POS works much better.

Contracts: having worked in tech for some time now I'm going to say data has a way of surprising people. Contracts baked into coins is going to be interesting to watch when bitter/fascinating things are attached to them. Reselling your car, maybe the original dealer gets a cut? Maybe taxes are baked in too. The maker needs a cut for environmental reasons and such. Oh the places we'll go :p
 

NightAntilli

Posts: 659   +822
You missed the point being made. Satoshi Nakamoto "a single person" is in fact not known to exist. That was the whole point. The spokesperson can't tell us anything because... we don't know, they've never come forward. Its like an unknown person you'll never meet is going to legally marry you, congratulations. Kind of see the issue. It's a bit odd for no reason.
I still don't see it. I definitely don't see the legally marrying part, because you're not bound by anything for using Bitcoin.

Privacy: No you're missing the point again. Traditional banks take more work to piece everything together because it's a fragmented system at its root, even if you're not trying. To make the point lets think bigger and pretend were big time drug kings. We just got paid and need to do something with that cash, that's where money laundering comes in, you move the money around and divide it so much it's impossible to track. Done, our friends took a cut, some extra taxes were payed and bang we have real money to use anywhere. Good times, nobody can catch use, it's done. Contrast that with crypto. We have a ton of money and we move it into a privacy coin, great and lets do the same process, move it and divide it and now we get to use it... only there's a problem. If at any point in that chain someone connects a real person to that money at any future time in history the can start to backtrack what went where to who and how much. That privacy coin money is going to follow you forever and the more you use it the more the privacy coin feature is removed. The problem IS the block chain baked into it. Hope this helps :)
This is the case for coins like Bitcoin. For something like Monero, you literally cannot connect a person to anything. IP is hidden, addresses are hidden, transaction amounts are hidden... There is nothing there to track.

Governments: This one is easy and I've found nobody that can answer the question. How do governments exist when they only have crypto to spend? You see the issue is no government ever in all of time has kept it's accounting squared. In other words for a nice example last year a lot of people wanted gov money when they were out of work. Where did that money come from? From nothing is the answer and that doesn't happen in a crypto world as a feature.
Exactly. And that is what makes crypto the best money system ever, because, no institution can steal your wealth by devaluing what you have in your bank.

These two systems are like oil and water and crypto believers think something that's never happened before in human history is going to take place and then it gets murky how everything will work after that when I've asked.
Not knowing how the cotton will be picked after slavery is abolished does not mean that we should not abolish it, nor that it will not be abolished.

This vibe reminds me of hippies from the 70's in California. Big dreams from long ago. The boring answer is it's not, people are going to want the systems to be how they are now because sometimes it works for them (even if they complain). The biggest thing crypto has going for it right now is fomo which makes more fomo and higher prices. I do know one other thing proof of work is a road to nowhere and should just go away, bitcoin is a bad idea. POS works much better.
PoS is by default more centralized, because the only way to acquire coins is to buy them from someone that already has them. With PoW, you can earn your own coins at any time, even if you have none. Whether that's financially viable is another story, but the option is still there.

Another way that PoS is more centralized is that the ones holding the coin are incentivized for holding only, to gain more rewards. With PoW, you have the cost of the work, which must be offset in some way, which means they are incentivized to sell at least part of their earnings to cover these costs, which contributes to decentralization.

And generally PoW is more secure than PoS.

Contracts: having worked in tech for some time now I'm going to say data has a way of surprising people. Contracts baked into coins is going to be interesting to watch when bitter/fascinating things are attached to them. Reselling your car, maybe the original dealer gets a cut? Maybe taxes are baked in too. The maker needs a cut for environmental reasons and such. Oh the places we'll go :p
It's much better if something like taxes is automatically implemented rather than there being a middle-man everywhere, having to file your taxes all the time and so on.

But more importantly, if stuff that the people don't like starts to happen in certain blockchains, there will always be a competitor around the corner that bypasses the issue. For example, if your car is connected to an NFT that automatically transfers a cut to the dealer when you resell the car, maybe Hyundai advertises that reselling their cars is 'free'.

It's the free market. The closer we get to free market the better. We definitely don't have that right now, and crypto is the one technology that can fast-track us to a much more open and fair free market.
 

terzaerian

Posts: 960   +1,399
Firstly, someone has to prove that Satoshi has ever existed. You have to "love" the new "progressive" currency where everything about its founders is a secret.

Secondly, this is a tech that will introduce total financial surveillance over society. With cash, you can have some privacy. But with crypto, there's no privacy. And the most ridiculous thing is that crypto proponents claim that crypto offers privacy. That's such a shallow lie, but their believers are even shallower.

Thirdly, the fact that governments (including those that exert maximum control over their population) are now racing each other to accept this tech, shows there's something wrong with it. Proving my second point.
Leaving aside how disingenuous it is that you grind your teeth about Satoshi's privacy in one breath, and then complain about the lack of privacy "in crypto" in the next, you're also nine-tenths wrong.

Bitcoin has never offered privacy by design; anyone that inferred privacy from it also probably thought their IP address was "private" as well. Furthermore, there are privacy coins, multiple examples: Monero, Zcash, Firo, and any other crypto that has implemented ZK-SNARKs proofs into the protocol (such as Tezos).

Finally, as for governments "racing each other to accept this tech," you're also either misinformed or maliciously misinforming. Governments are racing towards how to deal with private cryptocurrencies while trying to figure out how to implement their own CDBCs (e.g., cryptocurrencies pegged to a fiat currency issued by a central bank). Saying that the fact governments are trying to do this is like saying there is something wrong with computers or servers because governments use those as well. An oddly technophobic sentiment for a place called Techspot.

As for CDBCs, you actually are correct in your assertion that they could be used as tools for surveillance; your broken clock post finally hit its hour. That only underlines the importance of building self-sustainable, censorship-resistant private-sector cryptocurrency ecosystems and privacy cryptos, in order to insure that CDBCs are not the only option in the future. Your solution of ignoring or banning private cryptocurrencies insures the inevitability of total surveillance.
 

Markoni35

Posts: 1,118   +454
Leaving aside how disingenuous it is that you grind your teeth about Satoshi's privacy in one breath, and then complain about the lack of privacy "in crypto" in the next, you're also nine-tenths wrong.

Bitcoin has never offered privacy by design; anyone that inferred privacy from it also probably thought their IP address was "private" as well. Furthermore, there are privacy coins, multiple examples: Monero, Zcash, Firo, and any other crypto that has implemented ZK-SNARKs proofs into the protocol (such as Tezos).

Finally, as for governments "racing each other to accept this tech," you're also either misinformed or maliciously misinforming. Governments are racing towards how to deal with private cryptocurrencies while trying to figure out how to implement their own CDBCs (e.g., cryptocurrencies pegged to a fiat currency issued by a central bank). Saying that the fact governments are trying to do this is like saying there is something wrong with computers or servers because governments use those as well. An oddly technophobic sentiment for a place called Techspot.

As for CDBCs, you actually are correct in your assertion that they could be used as tools for surveillance; your broken clock post finally hit its hour. That only underlines the importance of building self-sustainable, censorship-resistant private-sector cryptocurrency ecosystems and privacy cryptos, in order to insure that CDBCs are not the only option in the future. Your solution of ignoring or banning private cryptocurrencies insures the inevitability of total surveillance.

Sorry, but if you didn't live in a cave for the last 10 years, everyone and his grandma claims "pay this with BitCoint for total privacy". The word "privacy" is the most repeated word next to crypto. I know there's no privacy, not even with those designed for privacy. And you know that too. But the audience has been convinced by media that cryptocur. offers privacy. Don't tell me it doesn't when they are bombarding us with those phrases.

My technophobia is only related to the enormous power that nasty people get with the development of technology. While at the same time ordinary people get more and more enslaved. Despite high potential for decentralization, in reality the power is being concentrated in the hands of fewer and fewer people, rather than distributed. The gap between the richest and everyone else is increasing rather than decreasing. Even though we've been promised the opposite "thanks to new technologies".

Censorship is stronger in 2021 than in 2020. And in 2020 it was stronger than in 2019. You now can't make even ordinary comments on YouTube if you mention certain people. They are protected by YouTube keyword-based automated censorship. And there's basically no competition. So, you're forced to use what everyone else uses, and your freedom of speech has been deleted.

And regarding Satoshi......... did you mention his "privacy"? LOL, just LOL. Is the governor of FED an invented person? Is the founder of Microsoft a virtual person? Are the founders of Google virtual persons? Nope. They exist. If Satoshi and friends do exist, we should know something about them. When they (or he) made a global currency that entered each home, his privacy privileges went out of the window. If he didn't want that, he should have been system admin in his local municipality.

The fact that even journalists didn't dig up anything concrete about him means that he probably doesn't exist. Which means that entire story about BitCoin is based on a lie. That really instills confidence in BitCoin and people behind it. Right?
 

Markoni35

Posts: 1,118   +454
Also, you're still thinking in the backwards terms.
"I'm so worried what will my government know about me".

That's not the problem for a long time. What is a problem is the following:
"What will private corporations know about me."

Because we're moving from one entity knowing something about you, towards thousands of entities knowing a lot about you, and exchanging their info, without any control. Government is not the enemy. Private corporations are.

So, while certain crypto may (or may not) hide your info from the government, there are certain corporations (*cough*google*cough*) that know a lot more about us than governments, and can do almost whatever they want with this information, with very little regulation imposed on them.

Despite all the bank runs and financial crises in the history, ordinary banks and governments are still a lot more stable and reliable, than private corporations. I'm the last person to defend banks and banksters. But at this moment, they aren't the worst enemy to our freedom. They were, in the past. But now our freedom has even more formidable enemies. Governments are little babies compared to these.
 

Markoni35

Posts: 1,118   +454
Here are some facts for all you climate alarmists;

After a very very long intro, probably designed to discourage the viewers, in the middle of the video they still admit enormous energy consumption. And we're talking about consumption NOW, when most of people don't really use crypto. Imagine what will happen when it becomes the main system of payment.

He also mentions that mining devices are getting more energy efficient. Which is technically true, and yet false. Because it obfuscates the fact that mining is getting harder and harder as hardware is getting faster. So, while the efficiency of computing is increasing, the amount of computing per currency unit is also increasing, to compensate for newer hardware speed efficiency.

And again, we're only counting the current energy consumption, when most of people don't even understand what crypto is, let alone use it. When everyone and your grandma start using crypto, we'll see abnormal increase in energy consumption. So, why is Greta so silent about it?

Please, don't get me wrong. I totally don't care about the CO2 hype. Bring more of it. The average world temperature is still on the cold side, so we need more CO2 not less. And plants adore it. The more CO2 the greener the Earth.

But...... I do care about energy consumption. We don't have enough RELIABLE power sources for electric cars, crypto and other increasing demands for energy. The last thing we need is more nuclear power plants.
 

terzaerian

Posts: 960   +1,399
But...... I do care about energy consumption. We don't have enough RELIABLE power sources for electric cars, crypto and other increasing demands for energy. The last thing we need is more nuclear power plants.
So that makes you pro energy-rationing then. Buh-bye.
 

mattferg

Posts: 171   +170
One million people aledgedly buying the global supply of graphics cards for a whole year.
What's wrong with this picture?

Investigate big tech. This is a price fixing scam that will cause a recession.


What's wrong with this picture? Probably the fact that's 1 million Bitcoin miners, and Bitcoin isn't mined on GPUs. Nice try though!
 

mattferg

Posts: 171   +170
Firstly, someone has to prove that Satoshi has ever existed. You have to "love" the new "progressive" currency where everything about its founders is a secret.

Secondly, this is a tech that will introduce total financial surveillance over society. With cash, you can have some privacy. But with crypto, there's no privacy. And the most ridiculous thing is that crypto proponents claim that crypto offers privacy. That's such a shallow lie, but their believers are even shallower.

Thirdly, the fact that governments (including those that exert maximum control over their population) are now racing each other to accept this tech, shows there's something wrong with it. Proving my second point.

1. Bitcoin is just one of many. The creator of Etherium is pretty well-known.
2. Monero has an encrypted ledger.
3. The fact China is racing to ban this, what does that say?
 

mattferg

Posts: 171   +170
You missed the point being made. Satoshi Nakamoto "a single person" is in fact not known to exist. That was the whole point. The spokesperson can't tell us anything because... we don't know, they've never come forward. Its like an unknown person you'll never meet is going to legally marry you, congratulations. Kind of see the issue. It's a bit odd for no reason.

Privacy: No you're missing the point again. Traditional banks take more work to piece everything together because it's a fragmented system at its root, even if you're not trying. To make the point lets think bigger and pretend were big time drug kings. We just got paid and need to do something with that cash, that's where money laundering comes in, you move the money around and divide it so much it's impossible to track. Done, our friends took a cut, some extra taxes were payed and bang we have real money to use anywhere. Good times, nobody can catch use, it's done. Contrast that with crypto. We have a ton of money and we move it into a privacy coin, great and lets do the same process, move it and divide it and now we get to use it... only there's a problem. If at any point in that chain someone connects a real person to that money at any future time in history the can start to backtrack what went where to who and how much. That privacy coin money is going to follow you forever and the more you use it the more the privacy coin feature is removed. The problem IS the block chain baked into it. Hope this helps :)

Governments: This one is easy and I've found nobody that can answer the question. How do governments exist when they only have crypto to spend? You see the issue is no government ever in all of time has kept it's accounting squared. In other words for a nice example last year a lot of people wanted gov money when they were out of work. Where did that money come from? From nothing is the answer and that doesn't happen in a crypto world as a feature. These two systems are like oil and water and crypto believers think something that's never happened before in human history is going to take place and then it gets murky how everything will work after that when I've asked. This vibe reminds me of hippies from the 70's in California. Big dreams from long ago. The boring answer is it's not, people are going to want the systems to be how they are now because sometimes it works for them (even if they complain). The biggest thing crypto has going for it right now is fomo which makes more fomo and higher prices. I do know one other thing proof of work is a road to nowhere and should just go away, bitcoin is a bad idea. POS works much better.

Contracts: having worked in tech for some time now I'm going to say data has a way of surprising people. Contracts baked into coins is going to be interesting to watch when bitter/fascinating things are attached to them. Reselling your car, maybe the original dealer gets a cut? Maybe taxes are baked in too. The maker needs a cut for environmental reasons and such. Oh the places we'll go :p

Man, this is poorly researched.

1. Satoshi is probably dead, this is why no one knows who he is exactly.
2. So you identified the person who cashed out the Monero to fiat. Where'd the Monero come from? Ahh, you can't see it, because it's NOT A PUBLIC LEDGER. Ok, so you got the address where it came from somehow? YOU CAN'T SEE ANYWHERE ELSE IT WENT TO, AS IT'S NOT A PUBLIC LEDGER. Genuinely one of the dumbest comments I've seen in a while.
3. Some Crypto is POS. This entire point is moot. Governments can issue their own crypto if they want and give themselves power to generate tokens...
4.. This genuinely makes no sense. Like I can't even see what you're trying to explain here? Why would the method of payment affect who gets a cut? You can sell things on eBay and eBay gets a cut... regardless of whether you pay with Visa or PayPal etc.

Go back to school buddy. This post was awful.
 

Markoni35

Posts: 1,118   +454
1. Satoshi is probably dead, this is why no one knows who he is exactly.

I don't wanna respond in someone else's name, but this first point is interesting. Satoshi is dead? Was he 70 years old when he invented BitCoin? How come we know the names of most notorious and inglorious hackers, but not someone who allegedly introduced the first crypto currency. Especially if he's dead, he certainly deserves to be mentioned.

Or, what is more likely, it was a fake name, because people in general trust Japanese products and people. Since they very rarely cheat. Which means it was a well-organized propaganda campaign, using a fake person, just to somehow make people accept this.

And when that happens, you have to ask yourself...... what's wrong with it that you have to use cheating in order to make people accept it. Everything about it is secretive, meaning that audience probably wouldn't be thrilled if they knew who is really standing behind BitCoin.