Quote from: franky1 on April 27, 2017, 10:02:54 PM

Quote from: digaran on April 27, 2017, 09:38:54 PM

I need to know why are you defending bitmain and BU? I can clearly see that you have some understandings of things and are concern about bitcoin but you are always in the other side but I just say what ever I believe is fact or it's just my opinion.

im not just defending BU or bitmain. i defend anything thats not blockstream(core)
things that gets attacked or used as a distraction (point the finger at) to avoid people seeing or questioning blockstream
because although theres all this temporary drama of point the finger how A, B, C maybe, if, could, might do something that lasts 2 minutes. its just distractions from what bitcoin really is.. the code

Quote from: digaran on April 27, 2017, 09:38:54 PM

Can we use ASIC machines for other purposes such as gaming or other computational processes other than hashing sha256?
With GPU you could use them for other things and they existed before bitcoin so unlike ASICs they weren't specifically manufactured just for mining.
Bitmain was established only to build machines focused on one thing and I call that control unless they were in computer hardware before and or now are making other hardware than miners?
ATI wont even bother to build their own GPU farms because they manufacture computer hardware and sell to the market while mining requires at least a year to ROI and that is not a guaranteed fact.

if you think it would be year ROI .. thats for end users based on RETAIL prices.
6 months based on wholesale price
3 months based on production price

now imagine for every gpu they wholesale they can make 2 gpu's meaning
meaning they could start getting returns instantly
because the 2nd gpu which they keep is literally zero cost because the retailer covered the cost with the first gpu via the wholesale price

this is where ASIC manufacturers are profiting. it does not cost $2k to make a ASIC.

Quote from: digaran on April 27, 2017, 09:38:54 PM

We're here to convince the undecided miners to chose the best option to proceed but we have forgotten the very obvious fact that only those with enough knowledge and understanding of cryptography and code are the ones currently mining and they will manage to figure out the truth for themselves and we're just wasting our times keeping a clean image of crypto.

yp and when a dev team bypasses node consensus, and only has 33% of pools vote.. then its also devs that should figur out the truth.. that maybe they need to go back to the drawing board and do things that would unite the community.. not point fingers at blaming everyone but themselves

Quote from: digaran on April 27, 2017, 09:38:54 PM

All we need we already have, bitfury and bitmain 2 big manufacturers and they both will keep each other in line though I wouldn't mind to have a third big company/pool to balance the power, we just need a functioning and stable network the rest are just back ground noise.

there is another asic manufacturing company, infact more then one more company.
but all this drama is prtending bitmain have 70% control. which is the illogical part of all this distraction techniques

It wouldn't matter if bitmain only produced 40% of the miners for Bitcoin, that's still a lot of miners being produced by 1 company and if said company is shady that's a problem.

If bitmain is blocking changes to Bitcoin to protect some secret advantage, that's a problem for ALL of us.

If bitmain has the ability to remotely kill their miners and their miners make up a significant amount of total miners in use, that's a problem for ALL of us.

It is undisputed that they have a lot of influence in the Bitcoin world.

Does it matter if bitmain is shady? The answer should be yes. It should matter a lot, at least to those who wish to see bitcoin prosper.

BTW, bitmain doesn't dispute the 70% producer of miners, why are you trying to?