Crypto Mining Hinders Space Science as GPU Prices Skyrocket and Supply Dwindles - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=Tudd;53145988]The ironic bit here is that contributing to the blockchain is inherent in the currency; So the "initial" user is actually doing more for others than what normal currency does if you want to metric it that way. Though this question is just extremely silly and built on a false premise that implies ordinary currency isn't somehow part of your "problem." [editline]20th February 2018[/editline] Or just realize in the short-term this is a market disruption that GPU manufacturers will just account for? Not like they won't have the funds to adapt to the new market and just manufacture more cards. Legislating over GPUs being sold out is just so pathetically a knee-jerk reaction to something so auto-correcting.[/QUOTE] How? Cheaper GPUs just mean that more people are gonna mine with them. Can you tell me one single good use and benefit that any of the main real existing crypto provides? Not in concept. It its actual use.

Blockchains are moving away from proof of work anyway from what I've seen, it has more issues then it's effect on the GPU market. I really doubt the mining craze will be some long term drain on power/GPUs, the fact that it is will lead to it's replacement.

[QUOTE=Killuah;53146542]How? Cheaper GPUs just mean that more people are gonna mine with them. Can you tell me one single good use and benefit that any of the main real existing crypto provides? Not in concept. It its actual use.[/QUOTE] People have been combining the @home distributed computing projects and cryptocurrencies. [url]https://curecoin.net/dev-blog/curecoin-2018-updates-and-roadmap/[/url]

[QUOTE=Killuah;53146542]How? Cheaper GPUs just mean that more people are gonna mine with them.[/quote] Not really sure if this is an argument to anything; But the difficulty curve largely determines which graphics cards are still profitable or not. [quote] Can you tell me one single good use and benefit that any of the main real existing crypto provides? Not in concept. It its actual use.[/QUOTE] I guess I would have to see how you define typical paper currency having "actual use" to see how you are defining differences between it and Crypto. Because the actual use of Bitcoin is just like any other currency. So I just want to see if were being consistent here.

[QUOTE=Humin;53146621]People have been combining the @home distributed computing projects and cryptocurrencies. [url]https://curecoin.net/dev-blog/curecoin-2018-updates-and-roadmap/[/url][/QUOTE] You still have to trade that in for other mined alt coins and then trade for bitcoins. This doesn't change anything, infact you're just making the 'cryptocurremcy' market even more confusing. [editline]20th February 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=Tudd;53146753]Not really sure if this is an argument to anything; But the difficulty curve largely determines which graphics cards are still profitable or not. I guess I would have to see how you define typical paper currency having "actual use" to see how you are defining differences between it and Crypto. Because the actual use of Bitcoin is just like any other currency. So I just want to see if were being consistent here.[/QUOTE] Dude its traded like a commodity, in an unregulated market that is purely based on speculation and has no financial and security backing unlike traditional currencies.

[QUOTE=SunsetTable;53146026]What are you talking about? GPU Makers aren't going to increase supply because this shit is a cancerous fad; they don't want to increase supply if demand is going to fall and Cryptocurrency is far from a stable bet with anything. We're not going to see this issue alleviate; there is no 'correction' this is the new norm because its not just cryptocurrency, its trading companies, researchers, gamers and more. Miners are literally just hogging them up for funbucks. [editline]20th February 2018[/editline] Banning its trade in the US alone would cripple the currency indefinitly because its main goal is to become a recognized normal currency for use in online payments. If it gets banned in a nation; the use of that goes away and thus the goal of legitimacy is ruined and so the normal person and average miner have zero use for it leading to a devaluation. You don't need to enforce it, the very threat of losing perceived value on a speculated market is enough to crash and burn the market.[/QUOTE] [url]https://www.polygon.com/2018/2/8/16993264/nvidia-gpu-supply-production-shortage-cryptocurrency-mining[/url]

[QUOTE=TheDestroyerOfall;53146783][url]https://www.polygon.com/2018/2/8/16993264/nvidia-gpu-supply-production-shortage-cryptocurrency-mining[/url][/QUOTE] I'll believe it when I see it. Until then, increasing supply paradoxically will probably enable larger power hungry farms.

Blockchain is still very early in its development. It has been a thing for years but it's not going away. These are the technical hurdles that cryptographic ledgers will eventually overcome. Just look at all of the chains out there that don't rely on mining as their main consensus method. Those of you who talk about how blockchain and mining is useless are missing the point of the technology. I completely agree that a lot of it has been co-opted for human greed but honestly, you can find human greed in anything if you look hard enough. There are so many useful applications and problems that blockchain can be applied to right NOW, we shouldn't be hampering its development just because it's wasteful. Blockchain needs to be regulated but very carefully; I can't imagine what it'll be like in another 10 years if it had government support and adoption.

[QUOTE=SunsetTable;53146767]You still have to trade that in for other mined alt coins and then trade for bitcoins. This doesn't change anything, infact you're just making the 'cryptocurremcy' market even more confusing.[/quote] So encouraging people to use their compute power for research rather than hashing which is literally just a waste of power "Isn't changing anything".

[QUOTE=Humin;53146837]So encouraging people to use their compute power for research rather than hashing which is literally just a waste of power "Isn't changing anything".[/QUOTE] Check out gridcoin, it's a blockchain that provides network consensus through scientific computing. Imagine if a chain like gridcoin managed to leverage human greed for research. [QUOTE=ilikecorn;53146790]Except without a steady value, it can't be used as a currency. If i leave now, i know my 5$ is enough to get a coffee. I know that tomorrow, it'll be enough. I know that next month, it'll be enough. I know that next year, it'll be enough. With bitcoin, I could leave now with 5 bitcoins, and by the time I got to the coffee shop, I could buy 3 coffees, or 0 coffees. Tomorrow my coins could be worth 300 coffees, or worth 0 coffees. I have no means of budgeting my bitcoins, because the value is constantly fluctuating. Its a value storage, not a currency.[/QUOTE] I honestly wish people would stop calling it crypto currency. A lot of the projects aren't even designed to use their tokens as a currency, for most it's simply a digital stake in the company behind the project. The name exists only because nobody knew what to call it when it first arose. [QUOTE=SunsetTable;53146848]They were doing it before? Look at the astronomical numbers with folding@home, or the fact the fucking PS3 could fold. When I was in uni, all the heavy duty computers not being used for rendering or math automatically started to fold at a lower tick rate. Folding@Home needed a monetary incentive in the same way we needed paid mods. Its a shallow hapless attempt to turn something noble and good into [B]another money generator.[/B][/QUOTE] Sorry to break it to you but almost all people do things not because they are noble and good but because they have direct positive impacts on their own lives. Consider how many people would be using idle processing for folding/scientific research if they were paid for the compute time?

[QUOTE=Humin;53146837]So encouraging people to use their compute power for research rather than hashing which is literally just a waste of power "Isn't changing anything".[/QUOTE] They were doing it before? Look at the astronomical numbers with folding@home, or the fact the fucking PS3 could fold. When I was in uni, all the heavy duty computers not being used for rendering or math automatically started to fold at a lower tick rate. Folding@Home needed a monetary incentive in the same way we needed paid mods. Its a shallow hapless attempt to turn something noble and good into [B]another money generator.[/B]

[QUOTE=SunsetTable;53146848]They were doing it before? Look at the astronomical numbers with folding@home, or the fact the fucking PS3 could fold. When I was in uni, all the heavy duty computers not being used for rendering or math automatically started to fold at a lower tick rate. Folding@Home needed a monetary incentive in the same way we needed paid mods. Its a shallow hapless attempt to turn something noble and good into [B]another money generator.[/B][/QUOTE] Yet adding a financial incentive would [i]vastly[/i] increase the amount of computation power provided, which has actual, tangible benefits. Get over your pride.

[QUOTE=geel9;53146852]Yet adding a financial incentive would [i]vastly[/i] increase the amount of computation power provided, which has actual, tangible benefits. Get over your pride.[/QUOTE] No it wouldn't?

[QUOTE=SunsetTable;53146855]No it wouldn't?[/QUOTE] To be clear, you're saying that paying people for running folding@home [i]would not[/i] increase the amount of people who use folding@home?

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;53145958]Okay, I'm posing this as a legitimate question. In what way does cryptocurrency benefit anyone other than the initial user.[/QUOTE] I'm not sure I understand this point, because 1. That's the purpose of money, 2. Crypto enables blockchain technology, which relies on transactions of crypto, and 3. I've seen many people complain that the reason this is annoying is because the Pc gaming market is affected. Using a GPU for this purpose benefits no one other than the current user. I'm not talking about using GPU for @home or similar tasks, but only because people [I]on[/I] facepunch have used the 'it hurts the pc gaming scene' argument. There's even one in this thread!

[QUOTE=Vodkavia;53146863]Legislating inefficient and wasteful versions of the tech would force it to evolve faster if anything[/QUOTE] Exactly, careful regulations can squash all of the shitcoins and worthless projects that eventually end up costing people a ton of money and resources. Are governments capable of providing loose regulations that impact only the wasteful chains? Probably not, at least for now but I'm hopeful that governments will foray into the industry, see the growth potential, and find ways to encourage the good parts and discourage the bad.

Come the fuck on its not imaginery monopoly money it's an asset. Get real. It's no different from stocks or my car, mattress, DS, laptop, TF2 Hats/CSGO skins or whatever. All these things can be traded for cash.

They're complaining about extra cost on 64 GPUs? Jesus. That's not even that many. I'm curious what cards they're looking for, though.

[QUOTE=geel9;53146871]To be clear, you're denying that paying people for running folding@home [i]would not[/i] increase the amount of people who use folding@home?[/QUOTE] Yes I am because in the long run eventually that would build up and then you're stuck in the same situation because everything goes back to bitcoin. And ontop of this the gains made in this mining process would be at a massive cost of resources and energy. This isn't a zero sum game; by monitizing a prebiously free charitabls service you'll ruin it in so much as creating another incentive to buy up inefficient computing methods when most research computers completely outpace in data crunching. We've seen it happen repeatidly across every form of attempt. Folding@Home Can happen on anything, dragging the monetary shitstain of crpytocurrencies in will ruin it.

[QUOTE=SunsetTable;53146890]Yes I am because in the long run eventually that would build up and then you're stuck in the same situation because everything goes back to bitcoin. And ontop of this the gains made in this mining process would be at a massive cost of resources and energy. This isn't a zero sum game; by monitizing a prebiously free charitabls service you'll ruin it in so much as creating another incentive to buy up inefficient computing methods when most research computers completely outpace in data crunching. We've seen it happen repeatidly across every form of attempt. Folding@Home Can happen on anything, dragging the monetary shitstain of crpytocurrencies in will ruin it.[/QUOTE] Uh no it won't? You're telling me people won't fold@home if they will get paid for it?

[QUOTE=FlandersNed;53146874]I'm not sure I understand this point, because 1. That's the purpose of money, 2. Crypto enables blockchain technology, which relies on transactions of crypto, and 3. I've seen many people complain that the reason this is annoying is because the Pc gaming market is affected. Using a GPU for this purpose benefits no one other than the current user. I'm not talking about using GPU for @home or similar tasks, but only because people [I]on[/I] facepunch have used the 'it hurts the pc gaming scene' argument. There's even one in this thread![/QUOTE] That's not the point of money, you're vastly oversimplifying three point of currency. Secondly, blockchain doesn't need to be wasteful in generating its coins, cryptocurrencies you avoid inflation intentionally design their system to get more and more inefficient. [editline]20th February 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=a-k-t-w;53146895]Uh no it won't? You're telling me people won't fold@home if they will get paid for it?[/QUOTE] Okay, so alt coins are mined now instead of bitcoin, yes?

[QUOTE=SunsetTable;53146898]That's not the point of money, you're vastly oversimplifying three point of currency. Secondly, blockchain doesn't need to be wasteful in generating its coins, cryptocurrencies you avoid inflation intentionally design their system to get more and more inefficient. [editline]20th February 2018[/editline] Okay, so alt coins are mined now instead of bitcoin, yes?[/QUOTE] [URL]https://www.gridcoin.us/[/URL] I still don't understand how you can say that monetizing scientific compute time would be bad. People are not naturally charitable, not everyone wants to spend their own money on electricity and hardware just to provide some flopping to researchers. However, most people need money to live and provide for themselves and others, I fail to see how paying people for their processing power is a negative thing. Besides, it's not like paying your silicon researchers is going to stop the people who were doing it for free.

I thought this thread was about something completely different, as someone [URL="https://cointelegraph.com/news/qtum-launches-first-ever-blockchain-node-into-space"]launched a crypto node on a smallsat recently lmao[/URL]

[QUOTE=a-k-t-w;53146887]Come the fuck on its not imaginery monopoly money it's an asset. Get real. It's no different from stocks or my car, mattress, DS, laptop, TF2 Hats/CSGO skins or whatever. All these things can be traded for cash.[/QUOTE] Except that bitcoin and CSGO skins are essentially nothing backed by nothing, a Car is a piece of machinery that can get me to my destination faster and has value based off of that and a number of other variables. A cryptocoin is nothing backed by nothing, and only has value based off of what people are willing to pay for it.

I get that there are projects, the central issue is that the big coin markets all have their money generation intentionally designed to slow down to avoid inflation. You still hand to trade those efficiently designed coins upward, this rewarding those shitty, unregulated coins. On top of this, because coins are generated efficiently in these systems, they will suffer from rampant inflation and thus you just run into the same problems once again. [editline]20th February 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=duckmaster;53146909]Except that a bitcoin is essentially nothing just like CSGO skins, a Car is a piece of machinery that can get me to my destination faster and has value based off of that and a number of other variables. A cryptocoin is nothing backed by nothing, and only has value based off of what people are willing to pay for it.[/QUOTE] (Hell CSGOs skins are backed by nothing as well).

[QUOTE=duckmaster;53146909]Except that a bitcoin is essentially nothing just like CSGO skins, a Car is a piece of machinery that can get me to my destination faster and has value based off of that and a number of other variables. A cryptocoin is nothing backed by nothing, and only has value based off of what people are willing to pay for it.[/QUOTE] You are wrong, they are backed by the dollar. You're forgetting that if your money is in the bank it's also "nothing". Just numbers in a computer. If my piece of machinery has a major mechanical failure it goes from $3000 to being worth scrap.

[QUOTE=SunsetTable;53146914] [editline]20th February 2018[/editline] (Hell CSGOs skins are backed by nothing as well).[/QUOTE] I meant to word it that way but I must not have been clear.

[QUOTE=duckmaster;53146909]Except that a bitcoin is essentially nothing just like CSGO skins, a Car is a piece of machinery that can get me to my destination faster and has value based off of that and a number of other variables. A cryptocoin is nothing backed by nothing, and only has value based off of what people are willing to pay for it.[/QUOTE] How is it nothing like a cs:go skin? It's a digital asset that can be traded for fiat currency lmao. The fact that people are willing to pay money for crypto just shows that it's an asset worth money. Also, last I checked pretty much all fiat isn't backed by anything except the state that issues it.

The top two teams by a wide margin for folding@home give monetary incentive. [url]http://folding.stanford.edu/stats/teams[/url] Curecoin is a cryptocurrency. EVGA uses evgabucks which are pretty much discount coupons for buying more evga products. Straining your argument to say that there is some kind of negative to more people using their computing power for really valuable scientific research seems nothing short of absurd to me.

[QUOTE=Humin;53146937]The top two teams by a wide margin for folding@home give monetary incentive. [url]http://folding.stanford.edu/stats/teams[/url] Curecoin is a cryptocurrency. EVGA uses evgabucks which are pretty much discount coupons for buying more evga products. Straining your argument to say that there is some kind of negative to more people using their computing power for really valuable scientific research seems nothing short of absurd to me.[/QUOTE] Oh great, EVGAbucks. That's... worth, something?