3 ms·
The more logical conclusion is that they simply see money to be made. I don't believe they are sending ANY signal that Bitcoin is reliable, trusted or stable.
by taligent 14y ago
The more logical conclusion is that they simply see money to be made.
I don't believe they are sending ANY signal that Bitcoin is reliable, trusted or stable. In fact I personally see this as a clear sign that Bitcoin is fundamentally unfair and easily gamed.
- celticninja 14y agoHow is it easily gamed? Production of bitcoins is related to processing power, if you can purchase the processing power you can increase your capacity to mine.
- etherael 14y agoWait, what? it's a sign that it's fundamentally unfair and easily gamed that the market is responding to the incentives implicit in the design? Miners don't just suck away all the value in the system, they are the value in the system; no mining, no blockchain, no blockchain, no transactions. More mining, more secure blockchain, etc.
- Andys 14y agoThey are taking a huge risk with this investment. With the mining reward set to automatically halve in 2013, and the currency still in its infancy, its a bold move. And despite dropping 6 figures on the hardware it barely a percent of the total hash rate.
- maxerickson 14y agoThey are only risking the amount that the hardware depreciates while they own it, which is apparently quite a lot less than the purchase price for this hardware.
- wamatt 14y ago> I personally see this as a clear sign that Bitcoin is fundamentally unfair and easily gamed. Curious that you used the word "unfair". It is quite likely that the fairness of bitcoin, is not related to it's future viability. Disparity is alive and well in the real world, and seems to be doing just fine.
- wr1472 14y agoWho said the creation of wealth should be or is fair? (not that I think it shouldn't be)
- excuse-me 14y agoMining is the problem - these people at Newmont/BHP/Barrick are trying to destroy the economy by digging gold out of the ground.