Quote from: Inaba on September 20, 2012, 08:15:29 PM

Huh, I never considered the fact that even if everyone canceled, we would still have the hashing power, but you're right. That thought does not sit well with me though, I definitely do not want BFL or any single entity to have that much hashing power under one roof, jeez. That would be a nightmare.

One problem of being a big mining entity is that you suddenly have to spend a lot of money on cyber security and you become a target for authorities.

@Inaba: if you're reading this what about the proposal of reduced profits I stated earlier. Can you comment on that?

Quote from: Jutarul on September 20, 2012, 06:50:12 PM

Here's a thought: Just use a mining client which allows you to filter the difficulty of blocks as you generate them. Just artificially mine at a higher difficulty (e.g. 100 fold) than the main network. That means that you throw blocks away which meet the network target, but not your own target.
Simple yet efficient. Also works on the test net.

That would be a comprise solution. You forfeit some of the profits, but you get to mine on the main network...

BTW I find it justified if a company decides to use their products to make profit. And I don't see the company as competing with miners, because it just engages in OWNERSHIP transfer when it takes the unit and sends it out to the customer. Big difference!