Top 20 Best Bitcoin Mining With Usb Of 2020 - Consumer

USB Bitcoin Miner Review - Top 4 USB Bitcoin Miner 2018

USB Bitcoin Miner Review - Top 4 USB Bitcoin Miner 2018 submitted by mdrafikulmei to u/mdrafikulmei [link] [comments]

USB Bitcoin Miner - Review & Complete Guide 2020

USB Bitcoin Miner - Review & Complete Guide 2020 submitted by Jack_devid to BitcoinMining [link] [comments]

White Paper, Miner, Pizza … | "Old Objects" in the Cryptocurrency Museum

White Paper, Miner, Pizza … |
https://preview.redd.it/giu1ssilga151.jpg?width=900&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=41510785ccdc0d99544ec74229f62427d1c0ce3e
Museum has played the role of a time recorder. Talking about bitcoin, more than ten years has passed since the creation of it. Although it is uncomparable to the stock market with a hundred years of history, during the ten years, in the different stages of the development of bitcoin and blockchain have continuously poured in geeks, miners, speculators, newbies, leaving keywords such as sudden rich, myth, scam, belief, revolution, etc.
There are also many “old objects” with stories in the “Museum” of the cryptocurrency realm. On Museum Day, let ’s review the stories brought by these “old objects”.
The First Digital Currency White Paper — Bitcoin White Paper
On Oct. 31, 2008, Satoshi Nakamoto released the Bitcoin white paper — A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System in the cryptographic mail group where he belongs, and Bitcoin was born since then.
A white paper is a document that explains the purpose and technology used in cryptocurrency. Usually a cryptocurrency uses the white paper to help people understand what it provides, and it is also an important information channel for investors to understand a project. Therefore, the level of the white paper affects people’s confidence towards the coin.
In a word, in the cryptocurrency and blockchain industry, the value of a white paper is equivalent to that of a standard financing speech. The white paper plays a vital role in this emerging market.
The First Public Bitcoin-Physical Transaction — Pizza
Since Satoshi Nakamoto mined the Bitcoin genesis block on January 3, 2009, Bitcoin has only been spread among the small crowd and has not realized its value.
Not until May 22, 2010, Bitcoin enthusiast “Laszlo Hanyecz” bought a pizza coupon worth $25 with 10,000 bitcoins. This is the first public bitcoin-physical transaction. Bitcoin has its price with 0.3 cents per bitcoin.


This day has also become the famous “Bitcoin Pizza Day” in Bitcoin history. Bitcoin as the imagination of the financial system has more practical significance. The tenth anniversary is coming. How will you commemorate it? Will you buy a pizza?
The First Digital Asset Exchange — Bitcoinmarket.com
After the birth of Bitcoin, in addition to mining, the only way to get Bitcoin in the early days was to conduct transactions on forums or IRC (commonly known as Internet Relay Chat). However, this method involves both long transaction time and great security risk.
In March 2010, the first digital asset exchange — Bitcoinmarket.com launched. However, due to lack of liquidity and transaction depth, it disappeared soon after its establishment, but Bitcoinmarket.com opened the era of the operation of the cryptocurrency realm exchange 1.0.


On June 9, 2011, China’s first Bitcoin exchange — Bitcoin China (BTCChina) launched. Its founder, Yang Linke, translated Bitcoin into Chinese “比特币” for the first time. In 2013, China’s bitcoin trading entered the golden age, and exchanges sprung up. China monopolized more than 90% of the world’s bitcoin transactions. Now, if the top three exchanges Binance, Huobi Global, OKEx are the Exchange 2.0, then the index exchange represented by 58COIN called the 3.0 version, leading the trend.
The First Generation of High-Performance Miner — ASIC Miner
When Satoshi Nakamoto created Bitcoin, the only way to get it is to use computers (including home computers) to mine, mainly relying on the CPU to calculate. However, as the value of digital currencies such as Bitcoin has become higher and higher, mining has become an industry with the competition is getting fiercer, accompanied by increasing difficulty of mining. Therefore, hardware performance competition starts.
In July 2012, the genius Jiang Xinyu (Internet nickname is “Friedcat”) from the junior class of the University of Science and Technology declared at the forum that he could make ASIC miners (chips). As far as mining computing power is concerned, ASICs can be tens of thousands or more higher than the same-generation CPUs and GPUs.
At the beginning of 2013, Zhang Nanqian (Pumpkin Zhang), a suspended doctoral student from the Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, developed the ASIC miner and named it “Avalon”.


In June 2013, the Friedcat’s miner USB was finally released, and it maintained 20% of the computing power of the entire network.
At the end of 2013, Wu Jihan, used the tens of millions yuan earned from Friedcat through investment, worked together with Jenke group, to develop the Antminer S1. Since then, the miner manufacturer Bitmain began to enter the stage of history.
It is no exaggeration to say that Friedcat and Zhang Nangeng have opened the domestic “mining” era.
The Birthplace of China’s Bitcoin — Garage Coffee
It is not only the “old objects” that record history, but also a place that everyone in the cryptocurrency realm aspires to.
Guo Hongcai once said, “Without no The Garage Café, there will be no cryptocurrency realm today. Since it is a very mysterious place that all waves of people from the café joint together to create today’s digital asset industry.

▲ In March 2013, American student Jake Smith successfully purchased a cup of coffee at The Garage Café with 0.131 bitcoins. This move attracted the attention of CCTV, and it conducted an interview.
Indeed, The Garage Café is the world ’s first entrepreneurial-themed coffee shop. It has been legendary since its establishment in 2011. The Garage Cafét is not only the core coordinate on China’s Bitcoin map, but also the birthplace of the Chinese cryptocurrency circle, where digital asset realm tycoons including Guo Hongcai, Zhao Dong, Li Xiaolai, Li Lin have made their ways.
The development of digital currency is only 11 years old. Through these “old objects”, we review the various stories of this wave of technology together, hoping to help you understand the development process of the digital currency field. Meanwhile, I also remind all practitioners to use history as a mirror and forge ahead.
Website: https://www.58ex.com/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/58_coin
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/coin.58COIN
Telegram: https://t.me/official58
Medium: https://medium.com/@58coin_blog/
submitted by 58CoinExchange to u/58CoinExchange [link] [comments]

Uninstalling this bullshit permanently. I suggest ALL of you do the same.

TL;DR: Avast has a bitcoin miner. It's literally more of a virus than an antivirus at this point.
I've literally been using Avast Free AV for a good 4 years now.
It gets the job done, low resources in the background, has the typical company telemetry scum though, but it's oh-so "disable-able".
I've ran with it for a long time, kept auto-updates on, and you know, at times gave it a pat on its back and allowed a bit of anonymous data collection when I really didn't care much about CPU power and wasn't on a WiFi data plan. Seems like a bit of a fair trade for a free software that I needed only to protect my system every once in a while.
Lately, I've reinstalled Windows, and upon setting up Avast again, I told it to stop everything with data-collection, even anonymous stuff, (even blocking the ips and sites of its scummy hidden adsense links that's deep in windows' network files) because lately my 8-year old CPU's been tanking and it can't handle much without chugging a bit. Within about less than 30 minutes of installing it on a fresh system, and even after a reboot (as I was still setting up my PC again), I noticed it was using a SHITLOAD of a lot of CPU. I'm talking like ~40% of a 6-Core 3.6ghz . Once again, I checked the settings and no telemetry options were enabled. I turned off Auto-Updates for the software itself as well as virus definitions, as I'd rather do them manually if it was causing this much usage. Nothing for pre-setup, no scheduled-scans, nothing at all extra, was running from the program. I figured maybe it was doing a system scan, as I wanted to trust Avast, and just let it do what it needed to.

Cut to today- I noticed an insane upload-speed problem with my internet. Soon, Windows disconnects my WiFi-adapter. I figured it was something with my USB 3.0 driver messing up again, as I need to run a USB 3.1 dongle for wireless as there's no room in my MB with my chonkyass GPU in the way. So I look at Task Manager, restart the service, and reconnect the WiFi dongle by just unplugging it and plugging it back into the USB port. And that's when I noticed ol' buddy Avast using up a ton of CPU again.
I thought, "Huh, maybe it's doing an auto-scan...?" I never specified it to do so, but it could've been something I missed in the setup, even though it would've been my 3rd time in-depthly reviewing it.
Open up Avast's UI, and nothing. No scans running, no scans in recent scan-history...
I try to ignore it, and look back at Task Manager and try to fix my WiFi adapter.

And OOOOH HERE WE GO.


The MOMENT I unplug my WiFi dongle, my total CPU usage goes from 89% DOWN TO 35%.
Avast's shotgun-ride of ~55% constant usage INSTANTLY stops.

"WOW, IT MUST BE DOING A BROWSER SCAN."
I CLOSE OUT MY BROWSER AND PLUG IN MY ADAPTER AGAIN, AND GUESS WHAT SHIT HAPPENS.

INSTANT.
40%.
CPU USAGE.

It was like I was jumpstarting a fucking car.
I try ONCE AGAIN, thinking, "I have all the telemetry disabled, no way would such a faithful company be mining an extremely petty amount of bitcoin in the background!"

I RESTART my computer, and give it it's little boot-time.
WITHIN A FEW FUCKING SECONDS of booting up, Avast SKYROCKETS to 50% CPU USAGE.

That's when I FUCKING lost it.
I found it crystal fucking clear that it wasn't doing any sort of update, web-scan, or anything. All my speed was "upload", not "download" according to Task Manager's report of network traffic.
I mean, it should've been obvious, right? Why was I getting an issue with my WiFi adapter in the first place? I mean, it was SO MUCH BANDWIDTH THAT IT LITERALLY DISCONNECTED THE DAMN THING.
Oh and no, I think it's blatantly obvious that no fucking program in the world needs 1.8 Ghz of CPU to upload some "anonymous virus scan data" or anything, despite the fact I had that stuff under their definition of "disabled". Avast Staff and all of you overpaid goons, don't even fucking try to quiver your lips.

...Uninstalled Avast instantly, left a fucking nasty message in their uninstallation survey's "other" category, don't even regret it one bit, hell even if my PC's as open as a fresh circumcision I don't fucking regret it.

Now...Existing Avast Users.
Are you happy, knowing that your PC is being illegally mined and bottle-necked all just to make a measly amount of money, WHICH WOULD BE LESS THAN PENNIES TO A CORPORATION LIKE THIS, the moment they notice a light-amount of CPU usage from your computer?
Or perhaps, these cunts mine your PC on a schedule.
"Yeah, we'll bitmine DESKTOP-12345 for 30 minutes starting 3:30PM. Trust me, they won't notice that short amount of time." "Just $3? Who cares, buy me a fucking donut with it, their fault they chose to install our product."

I wouldn't give a single shit if had only Avast hogged my resources like this for just 5 minutes every fucking month.
Not a fuck given even if it was for just a dime of their profit.
Any company that promises full-user telemetry disability in their preferences, yet despite your preferences, illegally enforces a trojan worse than most malware anyways, all for some scummy fucking coffee money, can spend the rest of its days before bankruptcy in hell.
Avast, was never this way, never this horrible. It was the reason why I kept an antivirus on my PC. Now the program's more of a bitminer than the ones it detects.
Fuck you Avast, burn in hell you fucking greedy cunts.
submitted by speeddog73 to avast [link] [comments]

Groestlcoin 6th Anniversary Release

Introduction

Dear Groestlers, it goes without saying that 2020 has been a difficult time for millions of people worldwide. The groestlcoin team would like to take this opportunity to wish everyone our best to everyone coping with the direct and indirect effects of COVID-19. Let it bring out the best in us all and show that collectively, we can conquer anything.
The centralised banks and our national governments are facing unprecedented times with interest rates worldwide dropping to record lows in places. Rest assured that this can only strengthen the fundamentals of all decentralised cryptocurrencies and the vision that was seeded with Satoshi's Bitcoin whitepaper over 10 years ago. Despite everything that has been thrown at us this year, the show must go on and the team will still progress and advance to continue the momentum that we have developed over the past 6 years.
In addition to this, we'd like to remind you all that this is Groestlcoin's 6th Birthday release! In terms of price there have been some crazy highs and lows over the years (with highs of around $2.60 and lows of $0.000077!), but in terms of value– Groestlcoin just keeps getting more valuable! In these uncertain times, one thing remains clear – Groestlcoin will keep going and keep innovating regardless. On with what has been worked on and completed over the past few months.

UPDATED - Groestlcoin Core 2.18.2

This is a major release of Groestlcoin Core with many protocol level improvements and code optimizations, featuring the technical equivalent of Bitcoin v0.18.2 but with Groestlcoin-specific patches. On a general level, most of what is new is a new 'Groestlcoin-wallet' tool which is now distributed alongside Groestlcoin Core's other executables.
NOTE: The 'Account' API has been removed from this version which was typically used in some tip bots. Please ensure you check the release notes from 2.17.2 for details on replacing this functionality.

How to Upgrade?

Windows
If you are running an older version, shut it down. Wait until it has completely shut down (which might take a few minutes for older versions), then run the installer.
OSX
If you are running an older version, shut it down. Wait until it has completely shut down (which might take a few minutes for older versions), run the dmg and drag Groestlcoin Core to Applications.
Ubuntu
http://groestlcoin.org/forum/index.php?topic=441.0

Other Linux

http://groestlcoin.org/forum/index.php?topic=97.0

Download

Download the Windows Installer (64 bit) here
Download the Windows Installer (32 bit) here
Download the Windows binaries (64 bit) here
Download the Windows binaries (32 bit) here
Download the OSX Installer here
Download the OSX binaries here
Download the Linux binaries (64 bit) here
Download the Linux binaries (32 bit) here
Download the ARM Linux binaries (64 bit) here
Download the ARM Linux binaries (32 bit) here

Source

ALL NEW - Groestlcoin Moonshine iOS/Android Wallet

Built with React Native, Moonshine utilizes Electrum-GRS's JSON-RPC methods to interact with the Groestlcoin network.
GRS Moonshine's intended use is as a hot wallet. Meaning, your keys are only as safe as the device you install this wallet on. As with any hot wallet, please ensure that you keep only a small, responsible amount of Groestlcoin on it at any given time.

Features

Download

iOS
Android

Source

ALL NEW! – HODL GRS Android Wallet

HODL GRS connects directly to the Groestlcoin network using SPV mode and doesn't rely on servers that can be hacked or disabled.
HODL GRS utilizes AES hardware encryption, app sandboxing, and the latest security features to protect users from malware, browser security holes, and even physical theft. Private keys are stored only in the secure enclave of the user's phone, inaccessible to anyone other than the user.
Simplicity and ease-of-use is the core design principle of HODL GRS. A simple recovery phrase (which we call a Backup Recovery Key) is all that is needed to restore the user's wallet if they ever lose or replace their device. HODL GRS is deterministic, which means the user's balance and transaction history can be recovered just from the backup recovery key.

Features

Download

Main Release (Main Net)
Testnet Release

Source

ALL NEW! – GroestlcoinSeed Savior

Groestlcoin Seed Savior is a tool for recovering BIP39 seed phrases.
This tool is meant to help users with recovering a slightly incorrect Groestlcoin mnemonic phrase (AKA backup or seed). You can enter an existing BIP39 mnemonic and get derived addresses in various formats.
To find out if one of the suggested addresses is the right one, you can click on the suggested address to check the address' transaction history on a block explorer.

Features

Live Version (Not Recommended)

https://www.groestlcoin.org/recovery/

Download

https://github.com/Groestlcoin/mnemonic-recovery/archive/master.zip

Source

ALL NEW! – Vanity Search Vanity Address Generator

NOTE: NVidia GPU or any CPU only. AMD graphics cards will not work with this address generator.
VanitySearch is a command-line Segwit-capable vanity Groestlcoin address generator. Add unique flair when you tell people to send Groestlcoin. Alternatively, VanitySearch can be used to generate random addresses offline.
If you're tired of the random, cryptic addresses generated by regular groestlcoin clients, then VanitySearch is the right choice for you to create a more personalized address.
VanitySearch is a groestlcoin address prefix finder. If you want to generate safe private keys, use the -s option to enter your passphrase which will be used for generating a base key as for BIP38 standard (VanitySearch.exe -s "My PassPhrase" FXPref). You can also use VanitySearch.exe -ps "My PassPhrase" which will add a crypto secure seed to your passphrase.
VanitySearch may not compute a good grid size for your GPU, so try different values using -g option in order to get the best performances. If you want to use GPUs and CPUs together, you may have best performances by keeping one CPU core for handling GPU(s)/CPU exchanges (use -t option to set the number of CPU threads).

Features

Usage

https://github.com/Groestlcoin/VanitySearch#usage

Download

Source

ALL NEW! – Groestlcoin EasyVanity 2020

Groestlcoin EasyVanity 2020 is a windows app built from the ground-up and makes it easier than ever before to create your very own bespoke bech32 address(es) when whilst not connected to the internet.
If you're tired of the random, cryptic bech32 addresses generated by regular Groestlcoin clients, then Groestlcoin EasyVanity2020 is the right choice for you to create a more personalised bech32 address. This 2020 version uses the new VanitySearch to generate not only legacy addresses (F prefix) but also Bech32 addresses (grs1 prefix).

Features

Download

Source

Remastered! – Groestlcoin WPF Desktop Wallet (v2.19.0.18)

Groestlcoin WPF is an alternative full node client with optional lightweight 'thin-client' mode based on WPF. Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF) is one of Microsoft's latest approaches to a GUI framework, used with the .NET framework. Its main advantages over the original Groestlcoin client include support for exporting blockchain.dat and including a lite wallet mode.
This wallet was previously deprecated but has been brought back to life with modern standards.

Features

Remastered Improvements

Download

Source

ALL NEW! – BIP39 Key Tool

Groestlcoin BIP39 Key Tool is a GUI interface for generating Groestlcoin public and private keys. It is a standalone tool which can be used offline.

Features

Download

Windows
Linux :
 pip3 install -r requirements.txt python3 bip39\_gui.py 

Source

ALL NEW! – Electrum Personal Server

Groestlcoin Electrum Personal Server aims to make using Electrum Groestlcoin wallet more secure and more private. It makes it easy to connect your Electrum-GRS wallet to your own full node.
It is an implementation of the Electrum-grs server protocol which fulfils the specific need of using the Electrum-grs wallet backed by a full node, but without the heavyweight server backend, for a single user. It allows the user to benefit from all Groestlcoin Core's resource-saving features like pruning, blocks only and disabled txindex. All Electrum-GRS's feature-richness like hardware wallet integration, multi-signature wallets, offline signing, seed recovery phrases, coin control and so on can still be used, but connected only to the user's own full node.
Full node wallets are important in Groestlcoin because they are a big part of what makes the system be trust-less. No longer do people have to trust a financial institution like a bank or PayPal, they can run software on their own computers. If Groestlcoin is digital gold, then a full node wallet is your own personal goldsmith who checks for you that received payments are genuine.
Full node wallets are also important for privacy. Using Electrum-GRS under default configuration requires it to send (hashes of) all your Groestlcoin addresses to some server. That server can then easily spy on your transactions. Full node wallets like Groestlcoin Electrum Personal Server would download the entire blockchain and scan it for the user's own addresses, and therefore don't reveal to anyone else which Groestlcoin addresses they are interested in.
Groestlcoin Electrum Personal Server can also broadcast transactions through Tor which improves privacy by resisting traffic analysis for broadcasted transactions which can link the IP address of the user to the transaction. If enabled this would happen transparently whenever the user simply clicks "Send" on a transaction in Electrum-grs wallet.
Note: Currently Groestlcoin Electrum Personal Server can only accept one connection at a time.

Features

Download

Windows
Linux / OSX (Instructions)

Source

UPDATED – Android Wallet 7.38.1 - Main Net + Test Net

The app allows you to send and receive Groestlcoin on your device using QR codes and URI links.
When using this app, please back up your wallet and email them to yourself! This will save your wallet in a password protected file. Then your coins can be retrieved even if you lose your phone.

Changes

Download

Main Net
Main Net (FDroid)
Test Net

Source

UPDATED – Groestlcoin Sentinel 3.5.06 (Android)

Groestlcoin Sentinel is a great solution for anyone who wants the convenience and utility of a hot wallet for receiving payments directly into their cold storage (or hardware wallets).
Sentinel accepts XPUB's, YPUB'S, ZPUB's and individual Groestlcoin address. Once added you will be able to view balances, view transactions, and (in the case of XPUB's, YPUB's and ZPUB's) deterministically generate addresses for that wallet.
Groestlcoin Sentinel is a fork of Groestlcoin Samourai Wallet with all spending and transaction building code removed.

Changes

Download

Source

UPDATED – P2Pool Test Net

Changes

Download

Pre-Hosted Testnet P2Pool is available via http://testp2pool.groestlcoin.org:21330/static/

Source

submitted by Yokomoko_Saleen to groestlcoin [link] [comments]

Uninstall Avast RIGHT NOW. It's so shit now that it literally has a Bitcoin Miner.

TL;DR: Avast has a bitcoin miner, took up a constant 50% of my CPU ONLY while my WiFi was on, with all telemetry options disabled and blocked. It's literally more of a virus than an antivirus at this point.
I've already uploaded this in avast but I figured I should spread this as much as possible. I can't express how mad I am at this fucking horseshit.
I've literally been using Avast Free AV for a good 4 years now.
It gets the job done, low resources in the background, has the typical company telemetry scum though, but it's oh-so "disable-able".
I've ran with it for a long time, kept auto-updates on, and you know, at times gave it a pat on its back and allowed a bit of anonymous data collection when I really didn't care much about CPU power and wasn't on a WiFi data plan. Seems like a bit of a fair trade for a free software that I needed only to protect my system every once in a while.
Lately, I've reinstalled Windows, and upon setting up Avast again, I told it to stop everything with data-collection, even anonymous stuff, (even blocking the ips and sites of its scummy hidden adsense links that's deep in windows' network files) because lately my 8-year old CPU's been tanking and it can't handle much without chugging a bit. Within about less than 30 minutes of installing it on a fresh system, and even after a reboot (as I was still setting up my PC again), I noticed it was using a SHITLOAD of a lot of CPU. I'm talking like ~40% of a 6-Core 3.6ghz . Once again, I checked the settings and no telemetry options were enabled. I turned off Auto-Updates for the software itself as well as virus definitions, as I'd rather do them manually if it was causing this much usage. Nothing for pre-setup, no scheduled-scans, nothing at all extra, was running from the program. I figured maybe it was doing a system scan, as I wanted to trust Avast, and just let it do what it needed to.

Cut to today- I noticed an insane upload-speed problem with my internet. Soon, Windows disconnects my WiFi-adapter. I figured it was something with my USB 3.0 driver messing up again, as I need to run a USB 3.1 dongle for wireless as there's no room in my MB with my chonkyass GPU in the way. So I look at Task Manager, restart the service, and reconnect the WiFi dongle by just unplugging it and plugging it back into the USB port. And that's when I noticed ol' buddy Avast using up a ton of CPU again.
I thought, "Huh, maybe it's doing an auto-scan...?" I never specified it to do so, but it could've been something I missed in the setup, even though it would've been my 3rd time in-depthly reviewing it.
Open up Avast's UI, and nothing. No scans running, no scans in recent scan-history...
I try to ignore it, and look back at Task Manager and try to fix my WiFi adapter.

And OOOOH HERE WE GO.


The MOMENT I unplug my WiFi dongle, my total CPU usage goes from 89% DOWN TO 35%.
Avast's shotgun-ride of ~55% constant usage INSTANTLY stops.

"WOW, IT MUST BE DOING A BROWSER SCAN."
I CLOSE OUT MY BROWSER AND PLUG IN MY ADAPTER AGAIN, AND GUESS WHAT SHIT HAPPENS.

INSTANT.
40%.
CPU USAGE.

It was like I was jumpstarting a fucking car.
I try ONCE AGAIN, thinking, "I have all the telemetry disabled, no way would such a faithful company be mining an extremely petty amount of bitcoin in the background!"

I RESTART my computer, and give it it's little boot-time.
WITHIN A FEW FUCKING SECONDS of booting up, Avast SKYROCKETS to 50% CPU USAGE.

That's when I FUCKING lost it.
I found it crystal fucking clear that it wasn't doing any sort of update, web-scan, or anything. All my speed was "upload", not "download" according to Task Manager's report of network traffic.
I mean, it should've been obvious, right? Why was I getting an issue with my WiFi adapter in the first place? I mean, it was SO MUCH BANDWIDTH THAT IT LITERALLY DISCONNECTED THE DAMN THING.
Oh and no, I think it's blatantly obvious that no fucking program in the world needs 1.8 Ghz of CPU to upload some "anonymous virus scan data" or anything, despite the fact I had that stuff under their definition of "disabled". Avast Staff and all of you overpaid goons, don't even fucking try to quiver your lips.

...Uninstalled Avast instantly, left a fucking nasty message in their uninstallation survey's "other" category, don't even regret it one bit, hell even if my PC's as open as a fresh circumcision I don't fucking regret it.

Now...Existing Avast Users.
Are you happy, knowing that your PC is being illegally mined and bottle-necked all just to make a measly amount of money, WHICH WOULD BE LESS THAN PENNIES TO A CORPORATION LIKE THIS, the moment they notice a light-amount of CPU usage from your computer?
Or perhaps, these cunts mine your PC on a schedule.
"Yeah, we'll bitmine DESKTOP-12345 for 30 minutes starting 3:30PM. Trust me, they won't notice that short amount of time." "Just $3? Who cares, buy me a fucking donut with it, their fault they chose to install our product."

I wouldn't give a single shit if had only Avast hogged my resources like this for just 5 minutes every fucking month.
Not a fuck given even if it was for just a dime of their profit.
Any company that promises full-user telemetry disability in their preferences, yet despite your preferences, illegally enforces a trojan worse than most malware anyways, all for some scummy fucking coffee money, can spend the rest of its days before bankruptcy in hell.
Avast, was never this way, never this horrible. It was the reason why I kept an antivirus on my PC. Now the program's more of a bitminer than the ones it detects.
Fuck you Avast, burn in hell you fucking greedy cunts.
submitted by speeddog73 to antivirus [link] [comments]

Decred Journal – September 2018

Note: you can read this on GitHub (link), Medium (link) or old Reddit (link).

Development

Final version 1.3.0 of the core software was released bringing all the enhancements reported last month to the rest of the community. The groundwork for SPV (simplified payment verification) is complete, another reduction of fees is being deployed, and performance stepped up once again with a 50% reduction in startup time, 20% increased sync speed and more than 3x faster peer delivery of block headers (a key update for SPV). Decrediton's integrations of SPV and Politeia are open for testing by experienced users. Read the full release notes and get the downloads on GitHub. As always, don't forget to verify signatures.
dcrd: completed several steps towards multipeer downloads, improved introduction to the software in the main README, continued porting cleanups and refactoring from upstream btcd.
Currently in review are initial release of smart fee estimator and a change to UTXO set semantics. The latter is a large and important change that provides simpler handling, and resolves various issues with the previous approach. A lot of testing and careful review is needed so help is welcome.
Educational series for new Decred developers by @matheusd added two episodes: 02 Simnet Setup shows how to automate simnet management with tmux and 03 Miner Reward Invalidation explains block validity rules.
Finally, a pull request template with a list of checks was added to help guide the contributors to dcrd.
dcrwallet: bugfixes and RPC improvements to support desktop and mobile wallets.
Developers are welcome to comment on this idea to derive stakepool keys from the HD wallet seed. This would eliminate the need to backup and restore redeem scripts, thus greatly improving wallet UX. (missed in July issue)
Decrediton: bugfixes, refactoring to make the sync process more robust, new loading animations, design polishing.
Politeia: multiple improvements to the CLI client (security conscious users with more funds at risk might prefer CLI) and security hardening. A feature to deprecate or timeout proposals was identified as necessary for initial release and the work started. A privacy enhancement to not leak metadata of ticket holders was merged.
Android: update from @collins: "Second test release for dcrandroid is out. Major bugs have been fixed since last test. Latest code from SPV sync has been integrated. Once again, bug reports are welcome and issues can be opened on GitHub". Ask in #dev room for the APK to join testing.
A new security page was added that allows one to validate addresses and to sign/verify messages, similar to Decrediton's Security Center. Work on translations is beginning.
Overall the app is quite stable and accepting more testers. Next milestone is getting the test app on the app store.
iOS: the app started accepting testers last week. @macsleven: "the test version of Decred Wallet for iOS is available, we have a link for installing the app but the builds currently require your UDID. Contact either @macsleven or @raedah with your UDID if you would like to help test.".
Nearest goal is to make the app crash free.
Both mobile apps received new design themes.
dcrdata: v3.0 was released for mainnet! Highlights: charts, "merged debits" view, agendas page, Insight API support, side chain tracking, Go 1.11 support with module builds, numerous backend improvements. Full release notes here. This release featured 9 contributors and development lead @chappjc noted: "This collaboration with @raedahgroup on our own block explorer and web API for @decredproject has been super productive.".
Up next is supporting dynamic page widths site wide and deploying new visual blocks home page.
Trezor: proof of concept implementation for Trezor Model T firmware is in the works (previous work was for Model One).
Ticket splitting: updated to use Go modules and added simnet support, several fixes.
docs: beginner's guide overhaul, multiple fixes and cleanups.
decred.org: added 3rd party wallets, removed inactive PoW pools and removed web wallet.
@Richard-Red is building a curated list of Decred-related GitHub repositories.
Welcome to new people contributing for the first time: @klebe, @s_ben, @victorguedes, and PrimeDominus!
Dev activity stats for September: 219 active PRs, 197 commits, 28.7k added and 18.8k deleted lines spread across 6 repositories. Contributions came from 4-10 developers per repository. (chart)

Network

Hashrate: started and ended the month around 75 PH/s, hitting a low of 60.5 and a new high of 110 PH/s. BeePool is again the leader with their share varying between 23-54%, followed by F2Pool 13-30%, Coinmine 4-6% and Luxor 3-5%. As in previous months, there were multiple spikes of unidentified hashrate.
Staking: 30-day average ticket price is 98 DCR (+2.4). The price varied between 95.7 and 101.9 DCR. Locked DCR amount was 3.86-3.96 million DCR, or 45.7-46.5% of the supply.
Nodes: there are 201 public listening nodes and 325 normal nodes per dcred.eu. Version distribution: 5% are v1.4.0(pre) dev builds (+3%), 30% on v1.3.0 (+25%), 42% on v1.2.0 (-20%), 15% on v1.1.2 (-7%), 6% on v1.1.0. More than 76% of nodes run v1.2.0 and higher and therefore support client filters. Data as of Oct 1.

ASICs

Obelisk posted two updates on their mailing list. 70% of Batch 1 units are shipped, an extensive user guide is available, Obelisk Scanner application was released that allows one to automatically update firmware. First firmware update was released and bumped SC1 hashrate by 10-20%, added new pools and fixed multiple bugs. Next update will focus on DCR1. It is worth a special mention that the firmware source code is now open! Let us hope more manufacturers will follow this example.
A few details about Whatsminer surfaced this month. The manufacturer is MicroBT, also known as Bitwei and commonly misspelled as Bitewei. Pangolinminer is a reseller, and the model name is Whatsminer D1.
Bitmain has finally entered Decred ASIC space with their Antminer DR3. Hash rate is 7.8 TH/s while pulling 1410 W, at the price of $673. These specs mean it has the best GH/W and GH/USD of currently sold miners until the Whatsminer or others come out, although its GH/USD of 11.6 already competes with Whatsminer's 10.5. Discussed on Reddit and bitcointalk, unboxing video here.

Integrations

Meet our 17th voting service provider: decredvoting.com. It is operated by @david, has 2% fee and supports ticket splitting. Reddit thread is here.
For a historical note, the first VSP to support ticket splitting was decredbrasil.com:
@matheusd started tests on testnet several months ago. I contacted him so we could integrate with the pool in June this year. We set up the machine in July and bought the first split ticket on mainnet, using the decredbrasil pool, on July 19. It was voted on July 30. After this first vote on mainnet, we opened the tests to selected users (with more technical background) on the pool. In August we opened the tests to everyone, and would call people who want to join to the #ticket_splitting channel, or to our own Slack (in Portuguese, so mostly Brazilian users). We have 28 split tickets already voted, and 16 are live. So little more than 40 split tickets total were bought on decredbrasil pool. (@girino in #pos-voting)
KuCoin exchange listed DCBTC and DCETH pairs. To celebrate their anniversary they had a 99% trading fees discount on DCR pairs for 2 weeks.
Three more wallets integrated Decred in September:
ChangeNow announced Decred addition to their Android app that allows accountless swaps between 150+ assets.
Coinbase launched informational asset pages for top 50 coins by market cap, including Decred. First the pages started showing in the Coinbase app for a small group of testers, and later the web price dashboard went live.

Adoption

The birth of a Brazilian girl was registered on the Decred blockchain using OriginalMy, a blockchain proof of authenticity services provider. Read the full story in Portuguese and in English.

Marketing

Advertising report for September is ready. Next month the graphics for all the ads will be changing.
Marketing might seem quiet right now, but a ton is actually going on behind the scenes to put the right foundation in place for the future. Discovery data are being analyzed to generate a positioning strategy, as well as a messaging hierarchy that can guide how to talk about Decred. This will all be agreed upon via consensus of the community in the work channels, and materials will be distributed.
Next, work is being done to identify the right PR partner to help with media relations, media training, and coordination at events. While all of this is coming up to speed, we believe the website needs a refresher reflecting the soon to be agreed upon messaging, plus a more intuitive architecture to make it easier to navigate. (@Dustorf)

Events

Attended:
Upcoming:
We'll begin shortly reviewing conferences and events planned for the first half of 2019. Highlights are sure to include The North American Bitcoin Conference in Miami (Jan 16-18) and Consensus in NYC (May 14-16). If you have suggestions of events or conferences Decred should attend, please share them in #event_planning. In 2019, we would like to expand our presence in Europe, Asia, and South America, and we're looking for community members to help identify and staff those events. (@Dustorf)

Media

August issue of Decred Journal was translated to Russian. Many thanks to @DZ!
Rency cryptocurrency ratings published a report on Decred and incorporated a lot of feedback from the community on Reddit.
September issue of Chinese CCID ratings was published (snapshot), Decred is still at the bottom.
Videos:
Featured articles:
Articles:

Community Discussions

Community stats:
Comm systems news: Several work channels were migrated to Matrix, #writers_room is finally bridged.
Highlights:
Twitter: why decentralized governance and funding are necessary for network survival and the power of controlling the narrative; learning about governance more broadly by watching its evolution in cryptocurrency space, importance of community consensus and communications infrastructure.
Reddit: yet another strong pitch by @solar; question about buyer protections; dcrtime internals; a proposal to sponsor hoodies in the University of Cape Town; Lightning Network support for altcoins.
Chats: skills to operate a stakepool; voting details: 2 of 3 votes can approve a block, what votes really approve are regular tx, etc; scriptless script atomic swaps using Schnorr adaptor signatures; dev dashboard, choosing work, people do best when working on what interests them most; opportunities for governments and enterprise for anchoring legal data to blockchain; terminology: DAO vs DAE; human-friendly payments, sharing xpub vs payment protocols; funding btcsuite development; Politeia vote types: approval vote, sentiment vote and a defund vote, also linking proposals and financial statements; algo trading and programming languages (yes, on #trading!); alternative implementation, C/C++/Go/Rust; HFTs, algo trading, fake volume and slippage; offline wallets, usb/write-only media/optical scanners vs auditing traffic between dcrd and dcrwallet; Proof of Activity did not inspire Decred but spurred Decred to get moving, Wikipedia page hurdles; how stakeholders could veto blocks; how many votes are needed to approve a proposal; why Decrediton uses Electron; CVE-2018-17144 and over-dependence on single Bitcoin implementation, btcsuite, fuzz testing; tracking proposal progress after voting and funding; why the wallet does not store the seed at all; power connectors, electricity, wiring and fire safety; reasonable spendings from project fund; ways to measure sync progress better than block height; using Politeia without email address; concurrency in Go, locks vs channels.
#support is not often mentioned, but it must be noted that every day on this channel people get high quality support. (@bee: To my surprise, even those poor souls running Windows 10. My greatest respect to the support team!)

Markets

In September DCR was trading in the range of USD 34-45 / BTC 0.0054-0.0063. On Sep 6, DCR revisited the bottom of USD 34 / BTC 0.0054 when BTC quickly dropped from USD 7,300 to 6,400. On Sep 14, a small price rise coincided with both the start of KuCoin trading and hashrate spike to 104 PH/s. Looking at coinmarketcap charts, the trading volume is a bit lower than in July and August.
As of Oct 4, Decred is #18 by the number of daily transactions with 3,200 tx, and #9 by the USD value of daily issuance with $230k. (source: onchainfx)
Interesting observation by @ImacallyouJawdy: while we sit at 2018 price lows the amount locked in tickets is testing 2018 high.

Relevant External

ASIC for Lyra2REv2 was spotted on the web. Vertcoin team is preparing a new PoW algorithm. This would be the 3rd fork after two previous forks to change the algorithm in 2014 and 2015.
A report titled The Positive Externalities of Bitcoin Mining discusses the benefits of PoW mining that are often overlooked by the critics of its energy use.
A Brief Study of Cryptonetwork Forks by Alex Evans of Placeholder studies the behavior of users, developers and miners after the fork, and makes the cases that it is hard for child chains to attract users and developers from their parent chains.
New research on private atomic swaps: the paper "Anonymous Atomic Swaps Using Homomorphic Hashing" attempts to break the public link between two transactions. (bitcointalk, decred)
On Sep 18 Poloniex announced delisting of 8 more assets. That day they took a 12-80% dive showing their dependence on this one exchange.
Circle introduced USDC markets on Poloniex: "USDC is a fully collateralized US dollar stablecoin using the ERC-20 standard that provides detailed financial and operational transparency, operates within the regulated framework of US money transmission laws, and is reinforced by established banking partners and auditors.".
Coinbase announced new asset listing process and is accepting submissions on their listing portal. (decred)
The New York State Office of the Attorney General posted a study of 13 exchanges that contains many insights.
A critical vulnerability was discovered and fixed in Bitcoin Core. Few days later a full disclosure was posted revealing the severity of the bug. In a bitcointalk thread btcd was called 'amateur' despite not being vulnerable, and some Core developers voiced their concerns about multiple implementations. The Bitcoin Unlimited developer who found the bug shared his perspective in a blog post. Decred's vision so far is that more full node implementations is a strength, just like for any Internet protocol.

About This Issue

This is the 6th issue of Decred Journal. It is mirrored on GitHub, Medium and Reddit. Past issues are available here.
Most information from third parties is relayed directly from source after a minimal sanity check. The authors of Decred Journal have no ability to verify all claims. Please beware of scams and do your own research.
Feedback is appreciated: please comment on Reddit, GitHub or #writers_room on Matrix or Slack.
Contributions are also welcome: some areas are adding content, pre-release review or translations to other languages.
Credits (Slack names, alphabetical order): bee, Dustorf, jz, Haon, oregonisaac, raedah and Richard-Red.
submitted by jet_user to decred [link] [comments]

J.P. Morgan Early Look at the Market – Fri 10.6.17 **PLEASE DO NOT FORWARD THIS DOCUMENT**

J.P. Morgan Early Look at the Market – Fri 10.6.17
*PLEASE DO NOT FORWARD THIS DOCUMENT*

Morning Levels

Trading Update

Top Headlines for Friday

Identifying risks – what could go wrong?

Macro Update

Calendar of events to watch for the week of Mon Oct 9

Catalysts – big events to watch over the coming months

Opinion/Interesting-but-not-immediately-impactful/intra-day boredom reading

Full catalyst list

  • Mon Oct 9 – China Caixin services PMI for Sept (Sun night/Mon morning)
  • Mon Oct 9 – German industrial production for Aug. 2amET.
  • Mon Oct 9 – earnings after the European close: LVMH.
  • Mon Oct 9 – Columbus Day holiday in the US (equities will be open while fixed income is closed).
  • Tues Oct 10 – German trade balance for Aug. 2amET.
  • Tues Oct 10 – analyst meetings: TECD, Santander, WDAY, WMT
  • Tues Oct 10 – PG shareholder meeting
  • Tues Oct 10 – earnings after the close: CUDA
  • Wed Oct 11 – US JOLTs report for Aug. 10amET.
  • Wed Oct 11 – Fed minutes from the Sept 20 meeting (2pmET).
  • Wed Oct 11 – analyst meetings: KR
  • Wed Oct 11 – earnings before the open: BLK, DAL, FAST, OZRK.
  • Thurs Oct 12 – Eurozone industrial production for Aug. 5amET.
  • Thurs Oct 12 – US PPI for Sept. 8:30amET.
  • Thurs Oct 12 – analyst meetings: BOX, HPQ, LSCC, WDC.
  • Thurs Oct 12 – earnings before the open: C, DPZ, JPM, LNN, Sky PLC, Tata Consultancy.
  • Thurs Oct 12 – earnings after the close: EXFO
  • Fri Oct 13 – China imports/exports for Sept (Thurs night/Fri morning)
  • Fri Oct 13 – US CPI for Sept. 8:30amET.
  • Fri Oct 13 – US retail sales for Sept. 8:30amET.
  • Fri Oct 13 – US Michigan Sentiment for Oct. 10amET.
  • Fri Oct 13 – US business inventories for Aug. 10amET.
  • Fri Oct 13 – analyst meetings: SAFM
  • Fri Oct 13 – earnings before the open: BAC, DRFG, FHN, FRC, JBHT, Man Group, PNC, WFC.
  • Mon Oct 16 – China CPI/PPI for Sept (Sun night/Mon morning)
  • Mon Oct 16 – Eurozone trade balance for Aug. 5amET.
  • Mon Oct 16 – earnings before the open: SCHW
  • Mon Oct 16 – earnings after the close: BRO, IEX, NFLX, Rio Tinto
  • Tues Oct 17 – Eurozone Sept auto registrations. 2amET.
  • Tues Oct 17 – German ZEW survey results for Oct. 5amET.
  • Tues Oct 17 – US import prices for Sept. 8:30amET.
  • Tues Oct 17 – US industrial production for Sept. 9:15amET.
  • Tues Oct 17 – US NAHB housing index for Oct. 10amET.
  • Tues Oct 17 – earnings before the open: BMI, CMA, CSX, GS, GWW, HOG, JNJ, MS, Pearson, PLD, Remy Cointreau, UNH
  • Tues Oct 17 – earnings after the close: ADTN, BHP, CP, CREE, IBM, LRCX, NAVI.
  • Wed Oct 18 – US housing starts for Sept. 8:30amET.
  • Wed Oct 18 – US building permits fro Sept. 8:30amET.
  • Wed Oct 18 – US Beige Book. 2pmET.
  • Wed Oct 18 – earnings before the open: ABT, Akzo Nobel, MTB, NTRS, USB
  • Wed Oct 18 – earnings after the close: AA, AXP, BHE, CCI, CCK, EBAY, LLNW, SLG, TCBI
  • Thurs Oct 19 – China Q3 GDP and Sept retail sales, IP, and FAI (Wed night/Thurs morning)
  • Thurs Oct 19 – US Leading Index for Sept. 10amET.
  • Thurs Oct 19 – earnings before the open: ADS, BBT, BK, DGX, DHR, GPC, KEY, Nestle, Pernod Ricard, PM, PPG, Publicis, RCI, Roche, SAP, SON, Thales, TRV, TSMC, TXT, Unilever, VZ, WBC.
  • Thurs Oct 19 – earnings after the close: ATHN, ISRG, LHO, MXIM, NCR, PBCT, WDFC, WERN.
  • Fri Oct 20 – US existing home sales for Sept. 10amET.
  • Fri Oct 20 – earnings before the open: Assa Abloy, BHGE, CFG, CLF, Daimler, DST, GE, GNTX, KSU, SLB, STI, SYF, TomTom, Volvo.
  • Mon Oct 23 – China Sept property prices (Sun night/Mon morning).
  • Mon Oct 23 – US Chicago Fed Activity Index for Sept. 8:30amET.
  • Mon Oct 23 – earnings before the open: HAL, HAS, ITW, KMB, STT, VFC
  • Mon Oct 23 – earnings after the close: ARNC, CR, OI
  • Tues Oct 24 – Eurozone flash PMIs for Oct. 4amET.
  • Tues Oct 24 – US flash PMIs for Oct. 9:45amET.
  • Tues Oct 24 – earnings before the open: AMTD, Anglo American, BASF, BIIB, CAT, CLB, CNC, FITB, GLW, GM, INFY, LLY, LMT, MAS, MCD, MMM, Novartis, PCAR, PHM, PNR, R, RF, SAH, SHW, SWK, WAT, WDR.
  • Tues Oct 24 – earnings after the close: AKAM, AMP, CMG, COF, DFS, ESRX, IRBT, T, TSS, TXN.
  • Wed Oct 25 – US durable goods for Sept. 8:30amET.
  • Wed Oct 25 – US FHFA home price index for Aug. 9amET.
  • Wed Oct 25 – US new home sales for Sept. 10amET.
  • Wed Oct 25 – earnings before the open: ALK, ALLY, ANTM, Antofagasta, AOS, BA, BAX, Dassault Systemes, DPS, FCX, FLIR, Fresnillo, HBAN, Heineken, IP, IR, KO, LEA, LH, Lloyds Banking Group, NDAQ, NSC, NYCB, Peugeot, TMO, TUP, V, WBA, WEC.
  • Wed Oct 25 – earnings after the close: ABX, ACGL, AFL, AMGN, CLGX, DLR, FFIV, FTI, KIM, LSTR, NOW, ORLY, PKG, PLXS, RJF, TSCO, UNM, VAR, XLNX.
  • Thurs Oct 26 – US wholesale inventories for Sept. 8:30amET.
  • Thurs Oct 26 – US advance goods trade balance for Sept. 8:30amET.
  • Thurs Oct 26 – US pending home sales for Sept. 10amET.
  • Thurs Oct 26 – earnings before the open: Aixtron, ALLE, ALV, Anheuser Busch, APD, Bayer, BMY, BSX, BWA, CCMP, CELG, CHTR, CMCSA, CME, Deutsche Bank, ENTG, EQT, F, HLT, MMC, NEM, Nokia, ODFL, Santander, Schneider Electric, UNP, UPS, WM, XEL.
  • Thurs Oct 26 – earnings after the close: AIV, ATEN, CB, CDNS, EXPE, FLEX, FTNT, GILD, GOOG, HIG, INTC, LPLA, MSFT, NATI, PFG, SYK, VDSI, VRSN.
  • Fri Oct 27 – China Sept industrial profits (Thurs night/Fri morning).
  • Fri Oct 27 – US Q3 GDP, personal consumption, and core PCE for Q3. 8:30amET.
  • Fri Oct 27 – US Michigan Confidence numbers for Oct. 10amET.
  • Fri Oct 27 – earnings before the open: B, MRK, PSX, SC, TRU, Volkswagen, WY, XOM.
  • Mon Oct 30 – US personal income/spending and PCE for Sept. 8:30amET.
  • Mon Oct 30 – US Dallas Fed index for Oct. 10:30amET.
  • Mon Oct 30 – analyst meetings: CSX
  • Mon Oct 30 – earnings before the open: HSBC
  • Mon Oct 30 – earnings after the close: AVB, CGNX, RE, RTEC, VNO
  • Tues Oct 31 – US Employment Cost Index for Q3. 8:30amET.
  • Tues Oct 31 – US Case-Shiller home price index for Aug. 9amET.
  • Tues Oct 31 – US Chicago PMI for Oct. 9:45amET.
  • Tues Oct 31 – US Conference Board Sentiment readings for Oct. 10amET.
  • Tues Oct 31 – earnings before the open: ADM, AET, Airbus, AMT, Barclays, BNP, CMI, ECL, GGP, K, MA, OSK, PFE, XYL.
  • Tues Oct 31 – earnings after the close: APC, CHRW, CXO, WFT, X
  • Wed Nov 1 – US ADP jobs report for Oct. 8:15amET.
  • Wed Nov 1 – US Markit Manufacturing PMI for Oct. 9:45amET.
  • Wed Nov 1 – US Manufacturing ISM for Oct. 10amET.
  • Wed Nov 1 – US construction spending report for Sept. 10amET.
  • Wed Nov 1 – US auto sales for Oct.
  • Wed Nov 1 – FOMC meeting decision. 2pmET.
  • Wed Nov 1 – earnings before the open: AGN, APO, CLX, EL, GRMN, HFC, Novo Nordisk, ORBK, Standard Chartered, TAP, TRI.
  • Wed Nov 1 – earnings after the close: ALL, BHF, BXP, CAVM, CSGS, FB, LNC, MANT, MET, MUSA, OXY, PRU, QCOM, ULTI, XPO.
  • Thurs Nov 2 – US nonfarm productivity and unit labor costs for Q3. 8:30amET.
  • Thurs Nov 2 – earnings before the open: ADP, AN, BCE, CI, Credit Suisse, DISCA, H, ICE, Royal Dutch Shell, Sanofi, Swiss Re, WRK.
  • Thurs Nov 2 – earnings after the close: AAPL, AIG, CBS, CRUS, FLR, HLF, RMAX, SBUX, UNIT.
  • Fri Nov 3 – US jobs report for Oct. 8:30amET.
  • Fri Nov 3 – US trade balance for Sept. 8:30amET.
  • Fri Nov 3 – US factory orders and durable goods orders for Sept. 10amET.
  • Fri Nov 3 – US non-manufacturing ISM for Oct. 10amET.
  • Tues Nov 7 – US JOLTs jobs report for Sept. 10amET.
  • Tues Nov 7 – US consumer credit for Sept. 3pmET.
  • Thurs Nov 9 – US wholesale trade sales/inventories for Sept. 10amET.
  • Fri Nov 10 – US Michigan Confidence preliminary numbers for Nov. 10amET.
  • Tues Nov 14 – US PPI for Oct. 8:30amET.
  • Wed Nov 15 – US CPI for Oct. 8:30amET.
  • Wed Nov 15 – US Empire Manufacturing for Nov. 8:30amET.
  • Wed Nov 15 – US retail sales for Oct. 8:30amET.
  • Wed Nov 15 – US business inventories for Sept. 10amET.
  • Thurs Nov 16 – US import prices for Oct. 8:30amET.
  • Thurs Nov 16 – US industrial production for Oct. 9:15amET.
  • Thurs Nov 16 – US NAHB housing index for Nov. 10amET.
  • Fri Nov 17 – US housing starts and building permits for Oct. 8:30amET.
  • Mon Nov 20 – US Leading Index for Oct. 10amET.
  • Tues Nov 21 – US existing home sales for Oct. 10amET.
  • Wed Nov 22 – US durable goods for Oct. 8:30amET.
  • Wed Nov 22 – US final Michigan Confidence numbers for Nov. 10amET.
  • Wed Nov 22 – FOMC 11/1 meeting minutes. 2pmET.
  • Fri Nov 24 – US flash PMIs for Nov. 9:45amET.
J.P. Morgan Market Intelligence is a product of the Institutional Equities Sales and Trading desk of J.P. Morgan Securities LLC and the intellectual property thereof. It is not a product of the Research Department and is intended for distribution to institutional and professional customers only and is not intended for retail customer use. It may not be reproduced, redistributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, without J.P. Morgan’s consent. Any unauthorized use is strictly prohibited.
submitted by SIThereAndThere to wallstreetbets [link] [comments]

Bitcoin, huh? WTF is going on? Should we scale you on-chain or off-chain? Will you stay decentralized, distributed, immutable?

0. Shit, this is long, TLWR please! Too long, won't read.
EDIT: TLDR TLWR for clarity.
1. Bitcoin, huh? Brief introduction.
There are 3 sections to this overview. The first section is a brief introduction to bitcoin. The second section looks at recent developments in the bitcoin world, through the analogy of email attachments, and the third section discusses what could be next, through the perspective of resilience and network security.
This is just a continuation of a long, long, possibly never-ending debate that started with the release of the bitcoin whitepaper in 2008 (see https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf). The recent mess during the past few years boils down to the controversy with the block size limit and how to appropriately scale bitcoin, the keyword appropriately. Scaling bitcoin is a controversial debate with valid arguments from all sides (see https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Block_size_limit_controversy).
I have researched, studied, and written this overview as objectively and as impartially as possible. By all means, this is still an opinion and everyone is advised to draw their own conclusions. My efforts are to make at least a few readers aware that ultimately there is only one team, and that team is the team bitcoin. Yes, currently though, there are factions within the team bitcoin. I hope that we can get beyond partisan fights and work together for the best bitcoin. I support all scaling proposals as long as they are the best for the given moment in time. Personally, I hate propaganda and love free speech as long as it is not derogatory and as long as it allows for constructive discussions.
The goal of this overview is to explain to a novice how bitcoin network works, what has been keeping many bitcoin enthusiasts concerned, and if we can keep the bitcoin network with three main properties described as decentralized, distributed, immutable. Immutable means censorship resistant. For the distinction between decentralized and distributed, refer to Figure 1: Centralized, decentralized and distributed network models by Paul Baran (1964), which is a RAND Institute study to create a robust and nonlinear military communication network (see https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_memoranda/2006/RM3420.pdf). Note that for the overall network resilience and security, distributed is more desirable than decentralized, and the goal is to get as far away from central models as possible. Of course, nothing is strictly decentralized or strictly distributed and all network elements are at different levels of this spectrum.
For those unaware how bitcoin works, I recommend the Bitcoin Wikipedia (see https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Main_Page). In short, the bitcoin network includes users which make bitcoin transactions and send them to the network memory pool called mempool, nodes which store the public and pseudonymous ledger called blockchain and which help with receiving pending transactions and updating processed transactions, thus securing the overall network, and miners which also secure the bitcoin network by mining. Mining is the process of confirming pending bitcoin transactions, clearing them from the mempool, and adding them to blocks which build up the consecutive chain of blocks on the blockchain. The blockchain is therefore a decentralized and distributed ledger built on top of bitcoin transactions, therefore impossible to exist without bitcoin. If someone claims to be working on their own blockchain without bitcoin, by the definition of the bitcoin network however, they are not talking about the actual blockchain. Instead, they intend to own a different kind of a private database made to look like the public and pseudonymous blockchain ledger.
There are roughly a couple of dozen mining pools, each possibly with hundreds or thousands of miners participating in them, to several thousand nodes (see https://blockchain.info/pools and https://coin.dance/nodes). Therefore, the bitcoin network has at worst decentralized miners and at best distributed nodes. The miner and node design makes the blockchain resilient and immune to reversible changes, making it censorship resistant, thus immutable. The bitcoin blockchain avoids the previous need for a third party to trust. This is a very elegant solution to peer-to-peer financial exchange via a network that is all: decentralized, distributed, immutable. Extra features (escrow, reversibility via time-locks, and other features desirable in specific instances) can be integrated within the network or added on top of this network, however, they have not been implemented yet.
Miners who participate receive mining reward consisting of newly mined bitcoins at a predetermined deflationary rate and also transaction fees from actual bitcoin transactions being processed. It is estimated that in 2022, miners will have mined more than 90% of all 21 million bitcoins ever to be mined (see https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Controlled_supply). As the mining reward from newly mined blocks diminishes to absolute zero in 2140, the network eventually needs the transaction fees to become the main component of the reward. This can happen either via high-volume-low-cost transaction fees or low-volume-high-cost transaction fees. Obviously, there is the need to address the question of fees when dealing with the dilemma how to scale bitcoin. Which type of fees would you prefer and under which circumstances?
2. WTF is going on? Recent developments.
There are multiple sides to the scaling debate but to simplify it, first consider the 2 main poles. In particular, to scale bitcoin on blockchain or to scale it off it, that is the question!
The first side likes the idea of bitcoin as it has been until now. It prefers on-chain scaling envisioned by the bitcoin creator or a group of creators who chose the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto. It is now called Bitcoin Cash and somewhat religiously follows Satoshi’s vision from the 2008 whitepaper and their later public forum discussions (see https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1347.msg15366#msg15366). Creators’ vision is good to follow but it should not be followed blindly and dogmatically when better advancements are possible, the keyword when. To alleviate concerning backlog of transactions and rising fees, Bitcoin Cash proponents implemented a simple one-line code update which increased the block size limit for blockhain blocks from 1MB block size limit to a new, larger 8MB limit. This was done through a fork on August 1, 2017, which created Bitcoin Cash, and which kept the bitcoin transaction history until then. Bitcoin Cash has observed significant increase in support, from 3% of all bitcoin miners at first to over 44% of all bitcoin miners after 3 weeks on August 22, 2017 (see http://fork.lol/pow/hashrate and http://fork.lol/pow/hashrateabs).
An appropriate scaling analogy is to recall email attachments early on. They too were limited to a few MB at first, then 10MB, 20MB, up until 25MB on Gmail. But even then, Gmail eventually started using Google Drive internally. Note that Google Drive is a third party to Gmail, although yes, it is managed by the same entity.
The second side argues that bitcoin cannot work with such a scaling approach of pre-meditated MB increases. Arguments against block size increases include miner and node centralization, and bandwidth limitations. These are discussed in more detail in the third section of this overview. As an example of an alternative scaling approach, proponents of off-chain scaling want to jump to the internally integrated third party right away, without any MB increase and, sadly, without any discussion. Some of these proponents called one particular implementation method SegWit, which stands for Segregated Witness, and they argue that SegWit is the only way that we can ever scale up add the extra features to the bitcoin network. This is not necessarily true because other scaling solutions are feasible, such as already functioning Bitcoin Cash, and SegWit’s proposed solution will not use internally integrated third party as shown next. Note that although not as elegant as SegWit is today, there are other possibilities to integrate some extra features without SegWit (see /Bitcoin/comments/5dt8tz/confused_is_segwit_needed_for_lightning_network).
Due to the scaling controversy and the current backlog of transactions and already high fees, a third side hastily proposed a compromise to a 2MB increase in addition to the proposed SegWit implementation. They called it SegWit2x, which stands for Segregated Witness with 2MB block size limit increase. But the on-chain scaling and Bitcoin Cash proponents did not accept it due to SegWit’s design redundancy and hub centralization which are discussed next and revisited in the third section of this overview. After a few years of deadlock, that is why the first side broke free and created the Bitcoin Cash fork.
The second side stuck with bitcoin as it was. In a way, they inherited the bitcoin network without any major change to public eye. This is crucial because major changes are about to happen and the original bitcoin vision, as we have known it, is truly reflected only in what some media refer to as a forked clone, Bitcoin Cash. Note that to avoid confusion, this second side is referred to as Bitcoin Core by some or Legacy Bitcoin by others, although mainstream media still refers to it simply as Bitcoin. The core of Bitcoin Core is quite hardcore though. They too rejected the proposed compromise for SegWit2x and there are clear indications that they will push to keep SegWit only, forcing the third side with SegWit2x proponents to create another fork in November 2017 or to join Bitcoin Cash. Note that to certain degree, already implemented and working Bitcoin Cash is technically superior to SegWit2x which is yet to be deployed (see /Bitcoin/comments/6v0gll/why_segwit2x_b2x_is_technically_inferior_to).
Interestingly enough, those who agreed to SegWit2x have been in overwhelming majority, nearly 87% of all bitcoin miners on July 31, 2017 prior to the fork, and a little over 90% of remaining Bitcoin Core miners to date after the fork (see https://coin.dance/blocks). Despite such staggering support, another Bitcoin Core fork is anticipated later in November (see https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-is-splitting-once-again-are-you-ready) and the "Outcome #2: Segwit2x reneges on 2x or does not prioritize on-chain scaling" seems to be on track from the perspective of Bitcoin Core SegWit, publicly seen as the original Bitcoin (see https://blog.bridge21.io/before-and-after-the-great-bitcoin-fork-17d2aad5d512). The sad part is that although in their overwhelming majority, the miners who support SegWit2x would be the ones creating another Bitcoin Core SegWit2x fork or parting ways from the original Bitcoin.
In a way, this is an ironic example how bitcoin’s built-in resiliency to veto changes causes majority to part away when a small minority has status quo and holds off fully-consented progress. Ultimately, this will give the minority Bitcoin Core SegWit proponents the original Bitcoin branding, perhaps to lure in large institutional investors and monetize on bitcoin’s success as we have it seen it during the past 9 years since its inception. Recall that bitcoin of today is already a decentralized, distributed, immutable network by its definition. The bitcoin network was designed to be an alternative to centralized and mutable institutions, so prevalent in modern capitalist societies.
Bitcoin Core SegWit group wants to change the existing bitcoin network to a network with dominant third parties which, unlike Google Drive to Gmail, are not internal. In particular, they intend to do so via the lightning network, which is a second layer solution (2L). This particular 2L as currently designed relies on an artificial block size limit cap which creates a bottleneck in order to provide high incentives for miners to participate. It monetizes on backlog of transaction and high fees, which are allocated to miners, not any group in particular. Cheaper and more instantaneous transactions are shifted to the lightning network which is operated by hubs also earning revenue. Note that some of these hubs may choose to monitor transactions and can possibly censor who is allowed to participate in this no longer strictly peer-to-peer network.
We lose the immutability and instead we have a peer-to-hub-to-peer network that is mutable and at best decentralized, and certainly not distributed (see https://medium.com/@jonaldfyookball/mathematical-proof-that-the-lightning-network-cannot-be-a-decentralized-bitcoin-scaling-solution-1b8147650800). For regular day-to-day and recurring transactions, it is not a considerable risk or inconvenience. And one could choose to use the main chain any time to bypass the lightning network and truly transact peer-to-peer. But since the main chain has an entry barrier in the form of artificially instilled high transaction fees, common people are not able to use bitcoin as we have known it until now. Peer-to-peer bitcoin becomes institution-to-institution bitcoin with peer-to-hub-to-peer 2L.
To reiterate and stress, note the following lightning network design flaw again. Yes, activating SegWit and allowing 2L such as lightning allows for lower transaction fees to coexist side by side with more costly on-chain transactions. For those using this particularly prescribed 2L, the fees remain low. But since these 2L are managed by hubs, we introduce another element to trust, which is contrary to what the bitcoin network was designed to do at the first place. Over time, by the nature of the lightning network in its current design, these third party hubs grow to be centralized, just like Visa, Mastercard, Amex, Discover, etc. There is nothing wrong with that in general because it works just fine. But recall that bitcoin set out to create a different kind of a network. Instead of decentralized, distributed, immutable network with miners and nodes, with the lightning network we end up with at best decentralized but mutable network with hubs.
Note that Bitcoin Core SegWit has a US-based organization backing it with millions of dollars (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockstream and https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@adambalm/the-truth-about-who-is-behind-blockstream-and-segwit-as-the-saying-goes-follow-the-money). Their proponents are quite political and some even imply $1000 fees on the main bitcoin blockchain (see https://cointelegraph.com/news/ari-paul-tuur-demeester-look-forward-to-up-to-1k-bitcoin-fees). Contrary to them, Bitcoin Cash proponents intend to keep small fees on a scale of a few cents, which in large volume in larger blockchain blocks provide sufficient incentive for miners to participate.
On the one hand, sticking to the original vision of peer-to-peer network scaled on-chain has merit and holds potential for future value. On the other hand, 2L have potential to carry leaps forward from current financial infrastructure. As mentioned earlier, 2L will allow for extra features to be integrated off-chain (e.g. escrow, reversibility via time-locks), including entirely new features such as smart contracts, decentralized applications, some of which have been pioneered and tested on another cryptocurrency network called Ethereum. But such features could be one day implemented directly on the main bitcoin blockchain without the lightning network as currently designed, or perhaps with a truly integrated 2L proposed in the third section of this overview.
What makes the whole discussion even more confusing is that there are some proposals for specific 2L that would in fact increase privacy and make bitcoin transactions less pseudonymous than those on the current bitcoin blockchain now. Keep in mind that 2L are not necessarily undesirable. If they add features and keep the main network characteristics (decentralized, distributed, immutable), they should be embraced with open arms. But the lightning network as currently designed gives up immutability and hub centralization moves the network characteristic towards a decentralized rather than a distributed network.
In a sense, back to the initial email attachment analogy, even Gmail stopped with attachment limit increases and started hosting large files on Google Drive internally, with an embedded link in a Gmail email to download anything larger than 25MB from Google Drive. Anticipating the same scaling decisions, the question then becomes not if but when and how such 2L should be implemented, keeping the overall network security and network characteristics in mind. If you have not gotten it yet, repeat, repeat, repeat: decentralized, distributed, immutable. Is it the right time now and is SegWit (one way, my way or highway) truly the best solution?
Those siding away from Bitcoin Core SegWit also dislike that corporate entities behind Blockstream, the one publicly known corporate entity directly supporting SegWit, have allegedly applied for SegWit patents which may further restrict who may and who may not participate in the creation of future hubs, or how these hubs are controlled (see the alleged patent revelations, https://falkvinge.net/2017/05/01/blockstream-patents-segwit-makes-pieces-fall-place, the subsequent Twitter rebuttal Blockstream CEO, http://bitcoinist.com/adam-back-no-patents-segwit, and the subsequent legal threats to SegWit2x proponents /btc/comments/6vadfi/blockstream_threatening_legal_action_against). Regardless if the patent claims are precise or not, the fact remains that there is a corporate entity dictating and vetoing bitcoin developments. Objectively speaking, Bitcoin Core SegWit developers paid by Blockstream is a corporate takeover of the bitcoin network as we have known it.
And on the topic of patents and permissionless technological innovations, what makes all of this even more complicated is that a mining improvement technology called ASICboost is allowed on Bitcoin Cash. The main entities who forked from Bitcoin Core to form Bitcoin Cash had taken advantage of patents to the ASICboost technology on the original bitcoin network prior to the fork (see https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/breaking-down-bitcoins-asicboost-scandal). This boost saved estimated 20% electricity for miners on 1MB blocks and created unfair economic advantage for this one particular party. SegWit is one way that this boost is being eliminated, through the code. Larger blocks are another way to reduce the boost advantage, via decreased rate of collisions which made this boost happen at the first place (see https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/breaking-down-bitcoins-asicboost-scandal-solutions and https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2017/04/10/the-relation-between-segwit-and-asicboost-covert-and-overt). Therefore, the initial Bitcoin Cash proponents argue that eliminating ASICboost through the code is no longer needed or necessary.
Of course, saving any amount electricity between 0% and 20% is good for all on our planet but in reality any energy saved in a mining operation is used by the same mining operation to increase their mining capacity. In reality, there are no savings, there is just capacity redistribution. The question then becomes if it is okay that only one party currently and already holds onto this advantage, which they covertly hid for relatively long time, and which they could be using covertly on Bitcoin Cash if they desired to do so, even though it would an advantage to a smaller degree. To be fair to them, they are mining manufacturers and operators, they researched and developed the advantage from own resources, so perhaps they do indeed have the right to reap ASICboost benefits while they can. But perhaps it should happen in publicly know way, not behind closed doors, and should be temporary, with agreed patent release date.
In conclusion, there is no good and no bad actor, each side is its own shade of grey. All parties have their own truth (and villainy) to certain degree.
Bitcoin Cash's vision is for bitcoin to be an electronic cash platform and daily payment processor whereas Bitcoin Core SegWit seems to be drawn more to the ideas of bitcoin as an investment vehicle and a larger settlement layer with the payment processor function managed via at best decentralized third party hubs. Both can coexist, or either one can eventually prove more useful and digest the other one by taking over all use-cases.
Additionally, the most popular communication channel on /bitcoin with roughly 300k subscribers censors any alternative non-Bitcoin-Core-SegWit opinions and bans people from posting their ideas to discussions (see https://medium.com/@johnblocke/a-brief-and-incomplete-history-of-censorship-in-r-bitcoin-c85a290fe43). This is because their moderators are also supported by Blockstream. Note that the author of this overview has not gotten banned from this particular subreddit (yet), but has experienced shadow-banning first hand. Shadow-banning is a form of censorship. In this particular case, their moderator robot managed by people moderators, collaboratively with the people moderators, do the following:
  • (1) look for "Bitcoin Cash" and other undesirable keywords,
  • (2) warn authors that “Bitcoin Cash” is not true bitcoin (which objectively speaking it is, and which is by no means “BCash” that Bitcoin Core SegWit proponents refer to, in a coordinated effort to further confuse public, especially since some of them have published plans to officially release another cryptocurrency called “BCash” in 2018, see https://medium.com/@freetrade68/announcing-bcash-8b938329eaeb),
  • (3) further warn authors that if they try to post such opinions again, they could banned permanently,
  • (4) tell authors to delete their already posted posts or comments,
  • (5) hide their post from publicly seen boards with all other posts, thus preventing it from being seeing by the other participants in this roughly 300k public forum,
  • (6) and in extreme cases actually “remove” their valid opinions if they slip by uncensored, gain traction, and are often times raise to popularity as comments to other uncensored posts (see /btc/comments/6v3ee8/on_a_reply_i_made_in_rbitcoin_that_had_over_350 and /btc/comments/6vbyv0/in_case_we_needed_more_evidence_500_upvotes).
This effectively silences objective opinions and creates a dangerous echo-chamber. Suppressing free speech and artificially blowing up transaction fees on Bitcoin Core SegWit is against bitcoin’s fundamental values. Therefore, instead of the original Reddit communication channel, many bitcoin enthusiasts migrated to /btc which has roughly 60k subscribers as of now, up from 20k subscribers a year ago in August 2016 (see http://redditmetrics.com/btc). Moderators there do not censor opinions and allow all polite and civil discussions about scaling, including all opinions on Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin Core, etc.
Looking beyond their respective leaderships and communication channels, let us review a few network fundamentals and recent developments in Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin Cash networks. Consequently, for now, these present Bitcoin Cash with more favorable long-term prospects.
  • (1) The stress-test and/or attack on the Bitcoin Cash mempool earlier on August 16, 2017 showed that 8MB blocks do work as intended, without catastrophic complications that Bitcoin Core proponents anticipated and from which they attempted to discourage others (see https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/uahf/#2w for the Bitcoin Cash mempool and https://core.jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#2w for the Bitcoin Core mempool). Note that when compared to the Bitcoin Core mempool on their respective 2 week views, one can observe how each network handles backlogs. On the most recent 2 week graphs, the Y-scale for Bitcoin Core is 110k vs. 90k on Bitcoin Cash. In other words, at the moment, Bitcoin Cash works better than Bitcoin Core even though there is clearly not as big demand for Bitcoin Cash as there is for Bitcoin Core. The lack of demand for Bitcoin Cash is partly because Bitcoin Cash is only 3 weeks old and not many merchants have started accepting it, and only a limited number of software applications to use Bitcoin Cash has been released so far. By all means, the Bitcoin Cash stress-test and/or attack from August 16, 2017 reveals that the supply will handle the increased demand, more affordably, and at a much quicker rate.
  • (2) Bitcoin Cash “BCH” mining has become temporarily more profitable than mining Bitcoin Core “BTC” (see http://fork.lol). Besides temporary loss of miners, this puts Bitcoin Core in danger of permanently fleeing miners. Subsequently, mempool backlog and transaction fees are anticipated to increase further.
  • (3) When compared to Bitcoin Cash transaction fees at roughly $0.02, transaction fees per kB are over 800 times as expensive on Bitcoin Core, currently at over $16 (see https://cashvscore.com).
  • (4) Tipping service that used to work on Bitcoin Core's /Bitcoin a few years back has been revived by a new tipping service piloted on the more neutral /btc with the integration of Bitcoin Cash (see /cashtipperbot).
3. Should we scale you on-chain or off-chain? Scaling bitcoin.
Let us start with the notion that we are impartial to both Bitcoin Core (small blocks, off-chain scaling only) and Bitcoin Cash (big blocks, on-chain scaling only) schools of thought. We will support any or all ideas, as long as they allow for bitcoin to grow organically and eventually succeed as a peer-to-peer network that remains decentralized, distributed, immutable. Should we have a preference in either of the proposed scaling solutions?
First, let us briefly address Bitcoin Core and small blocks again. From the second section of this overview, we understand that there are proposed off-chain scaling methods via second layer solutions (2L), most notably soon-to-be implemented lightning via SegWit on Bitcoin Core. Unfortunately, the lightning network diminishes distributed and immutable network properties by replacing bitcoin’s peer-to-peer network with a two-layer institution-to-institution network and peer-to-hub-to-peer 2L. Do we need this particular 2L right now? Is its complexity truly needed? Is it not at best somewhat cumbersome (if not very redundant)? In addition to ridiculously high on-chain transaction fees illustrated in the earlier section, the lightning network code is perhaps more robust than it needs to be now, with thousands of lines of code, thus possibly opening up to new vectors for bugs or attacks (see https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Lightning_Network and https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd). Additionally, this particular 2L as currently designed unnecessarily introduces third parties, hubs, that are expected to centralize. We already have a working code that has been tested and proven to handle 8MB blocks, as seen with Bitcoin Cash on August 16, 2017 (see https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/first-8mb-bitcoin-cash-block-just-mined). At best, these third party hubs would be decentralized but they would not be distributed. And these hubs would be by no means integral to the original bitcoin network with users, nodes, and miners.
To paraphrase Ocam’s razor problem solving principle, the simplest solution with the most desirable features will prevail (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor). The simplest scalability solution today is Bitcoin Cash because it updates only one line of code, which instantly increases the block size limit. This also allows other companies building on Bitcoin Cash to reduce their codes when compared to Bitcoin Core SegWit’s longer code, some even claiming ten-fold reductions (see /btc/comments/6vdm7y/ryan_x_charles_reveals_bcc_plan). The bitcoin ecosystem not only includes the network but it also includes companies building services on top of it. When these companies can reduce their vectors for bugs or attacks, the entire ecosystem is healthier and more resilient to hacking disasters. Obviously, changes to the bitcoin network code are desirable to be as few and as elegant as possible.
But what are the long-term implications of doing the one-line update repeatedly? Eventually, blocks would have to reach over 500MB size if they were to process Visa-level capacity (see https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability). With decreasing costs of IT infrastructure, bandwidth and storage could accommodate it, but the overhead costs would increase significantly, implying miner and/or full node centralization further discussed next. To decrease this particular centralization risk, which some consider undesirable and others consider irrelevant, built-in and integrated 2L could keep the block size at a reasonably small-yet-still-large limit.
At the first sight, these 2L would remedy the risk of centralization by creating their own centralization incentive. At the closer look and Ocam’s razor principle again, these 2L do not have to become revenue-seeking third party hubs as designed with the current lightning network. They can be integrated into the current bitcoin network with at worst decentralized miners and at best distributed nodes. Recall that miners will eventually need to supplement their diminishing mining reward from new blocks. Additionally, as of today, the nodes have no built-in economic incentive to run other than securing the network and keeping the network’s overall value at its current level. Therefore, if new 2L were to be developed, they should be designed in a similar way like the lightning network, with the difference that the transaction processing revenue would not go to third party hubs but to the already integrated miners and nodes.
In other words, why do we need extra hubs if we have miners and nodes already? Let us consider the good elements from the lightning network, forget the unnecessary hubs, and focus on integrating the hubs’ responsibilities to already existing miner and node protocols. Why would we add extra elements to the system that already functions with the minimum number of elements possible? Hence, 2L are not necessarily undesirable as long as they do not unnecessarily introduce third party hubs.
Lastly, let us discuss partial on-chain scaling with the overall goal of network security. The network security we seek is the immutability and resilience via distributed elements within otherwise decentralized and distributed network. It is not inconceivable to scale bitcoin with bigger blocks as needed, when needed, to a certain degree. The thought process is the following:
  • (1) Block size limit:
We need some upper limit to avoid bloating the network with spam transactions. Okay, that makes sense. Now, what should this limit be? If we agree to disagree with small block size limit stuck at 1MB, and if we are fine with flexible block size limit increases (inspired by mining difficulty readjustments but on a longer time scale) or big block propositions (to be increased incrementally), what is holding us off next?
  • (2) Miner centralization:
Bigger blocks mean that more data will be transferred on the bitcoin network. Consequently, more bandwidth and data storage will be required. This will create decentralized miners instead of distributed ones. Yes, that is true. And it has already happened, due to the economy of scale, in particular the efficiency of grouping multiple miners in centralized facilities, and the creation of mining pools collectively and virtually connecting groups of miners not physically present in the same facility. These facilities tend to have huge overhead costs and the data storage and bandwidth increase costs are negligible in this context. The individual miners participating in mining pools will quite likely notice somewhat higher operational costs but allowing for additional revenue from integrated 2L described earlier will give them economic incentive to remain actively participating. Note that mining was never supposed to be strictly distributed and it was always at worst decentralized, as defined in the first section of this overview. To assure at best a distributed network, we have nodes.
  • (3) Node centralization:
Bigger blocks mean that more data will be transferred on the bitcoin network. Consequently, more bandwidth and data storage will be required. This will create decentralized nodes instead of distributed ones. Again, recall that we have a spectrum of decentralized and distributed networks in mind, not their absolutes. The concern about the node centralization (and the subsequent shift from distributed to decentralized network property) is valid if we only follow on-chain scaling to inconsiderate MB values. If addressed with the proposed integrated 2L that provides previously unseen economic incentives to participate in the network, this concern is less serious.
Furthermore, other methods to reduce bandwidth and storage needs can be used. A popular proposal is block pruning, which keeps only the most recent 550 blocks, and eventually deletes any older blocks (see https://news.bitcoin.com/pros-and-cons-on-bitcoin-block-pruning). Block pruning addresses storage needs and makes sure that not all nodes participating in the bitcoin network have to store all transactions that have ever been recorded on the blockchain. Some nodes storing all transactions are still necessary and they are called full nodes. Block pruning does not eliminate full nodes but it does indeed provide an economic incentive for the reduction and centralization (i.e. saving on storage costs). If addressed with the proposed integrated 2L that provides previously unseen economic incentives to participate in the network, this concern is less serious.
In other words, properly designed 2L should provide economic incentives for all nodes (full and pruned) to remain active and distributed. As of now, only miners earn revenue for participating. The lightning network proposes extra revenue for hubs. Instead, miner revenue could increase by processing 2L transactions as well, and full nodes could have an economic incentive as well. To mine, relatively high startup costs is necessary in order to get the most up to date mining hardware and proper cooling equipment. These have to be maintained and periodically upgraded. To run a full node, one needs only stable bandwidth and a sufficiently large storage, which can be expanded as needed, when needed. To run a full node, one needs only stable bandwidth and relatively small storage, which does not need to be expanded.
Keeping the distributed characteristic in mind, it would be much more secure for the bitcoin network if one could earn bitcoin by simply running a node, full or pruned. This could be integrated with a simple code change requiring each node to own a bitcoin address to which miners would send a fraction of processed transaction fees. Of course, pruned nodes would collectively receive the least transaction fee revenue (e.g. 10%), full nodes would collectively receive relatively larger transaction fee revenue (e.g. 20%), whereas mining facilities or mining pools would individually receive the largest transaction fee revenue (e.g. 70%) in addition to the full mining reward from newly mined blocks (i.e. 100%). This would assure that all nodes would remain relatively distributed. Hence, block pruning is a feasible solution.
However, in order to start pruning, one would have to have the full blockchain to begin with. As currently designed, downloading blockchain for the first time also audits previous blocks for accuracy, this can take days depending on one’s bandwidth. This online method is the only way to distribute the bitcoin blockchain and the bitcoin network so far. When the size of blockchain becomes a concern, a simpler distribution idea should be implemented offline. Consider distributions of Linux-based operating systems on USBs. Similarly, the full bitcoin blockchain up to a certain point can be distributed via easy-to-mail USBs. Note that even if we were to get the blockchain in bulk on such a USB, some form of a block audit would have to happen nevertheless.
A new form of checkpoint hashes could be added to the bitcoin code. For instance, each 2016 blocks (whenever the difficulty readjusts), all IDs from previous 2015 blocks would be hashed and recorded. That way, with our particular offline blockchain distribution, the first time user would have to audit only the key 2016th blocks, designed to occur on average once in roughly 2 weeks. This would significantly reduce bandwidth concerns for the auditing process because only each 2016th block would have to be uploaded online to be audited.
Overall, we are able to scale the bitcoin network via initial on-chain scaling approaches supplemented with off-chain scaling approaches. This upgrades the current network to a pruned peer-to-peer network with integrated 2L managed by miners and nodes who assure that the bitcoin network stays decentralized, distributed, immutable.
  • Discussion at /btc/comments/6vj47c/bitcoin_huh_wtf_is_going_on_should_we_scale_you is greatly encouraged.
  • Note that the author u/bit-architect appreciates any Bitcoin Cash donations on Reddit directly or on bitcoin addresses 178ZTiot2QVVKjru2f9MpzyeYawP81vaXi bitcoincash:qp7uqpv2tsftrdmu6e8qglwr2r38u4twlq3f7a48uq (Bitcoin Cash) and 1GqcFi4Cs1LVAxLxD3XMbJZbmjxD8SYY8S (Bitcoin Core).
  • EDIT: Donation addresses above updated.
submitted by bit-architect to btc [link] [comments]

Should You Buy An Antminer USB Bitcoin ASIC Miner In 2020? USB Bitcoin Miner - The Power of 1000's Computers Most Powerful USB Litecoin Miner Put to the Test USB ASIC miner unboxing and testing Are USB Bitcoin Miners Profitable RIGHT NOW In 2020?

Top 10 Bitcoin Mining With Usb of 2020 – Consumer Guide & Reviews Rank No. #1 GekkoScience NewPac 130Gh/s+ USB Bitcoin / SHA256 Stick Miner Most Efficient, Powerful USB Miner on Market Find helpful customer reviews and review ratings for BPMC Red Fury USB 2.2-2.7 GH/s Bitcoin Miner at Amazon.com. Read honest and unbiased product reviews from our users. Today, we will be looking into how a USB ASIC miner work and if it is still profitable for mining in 2020. The Origin of the USB ASIC Miner. While at first Bitcoin could only be mined with CPU power, in 2013, a new type of mining hardware emerged the ASIC miner (Application Specific Integrated Circuit).. ASICs are special hardware designed only for mining cryptocurrencies that are based on the Want to know about Honeyminer? Want to start mining Bitcoin without much investment? If you resound with these questions, you are in the right place. I have been exploring options to mine Bitcoin cheaply but wasn’t able to find any solutions yet. But recently found out about Honeyminer and tried Read moreHoneyminer Review: Does it really work in 2020? T9 is yet another excellent best bitcoin miner 2020 on the list. It should, however, be pointed out that it is slightly on the higher price range. With regards to comparing the T9 to the S9, miners are split on which is better. Below is a brief review of the T9 that will allow choosing between the two an easy process.

[index] [23725] [3393] [5043] [7869] [19444] [5548] [13191] [3463] [19206] [23853]

Should You Buy An Antminer USB Bitcoin ASIC Miner In 2020?

Configuration on a raspberry pi zero with a 5 inch screen and powered USB hub. LITECOIN: MQScfHtyySfMqd3a4pLuWBuiFiNJoiQEsE RIPPLE: rE9HrF1Cc5JKozEtGPaNHEyeuJ1HrA57fi ... FutureBit Moonlander 2 USB Scrypt ASIC Miner is the perfect choice hobbyists and educational purposes. It is not fair to expect profits from it! You can get one for as low as $50. Point it to a ... Today we put the FutureBit MoonLander 2 LiteCoin Scrypt Miner USB Stick to the test and see hash rates and also a tutorial on how to set it up (it's so easy!). We like it that it has a fan built in. USB Bitcoin Miner - The Power of 1000's Computers - Duration: ... The Best ASIC Miner For Residential Mining - FutureBit Apollo Review - Duration: 18:23. VoskCoin 46,788 views. 18:23. SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE HOW MUCH - http://shorturl.at/arBHL GekkoScience NewPac USB Miner - https://bit.ly/2RIQgdX GekkoScience 8 Port USB Hub - https://bit.ly/2x...

Flag Counter