Is Monero (XMR) the best cryptocurrency mining software for private users? - PART 1
In the Bitcoin's white paper, it's creator stated that:
As long as a majority of CPU power is controlled by nodes that are not cooperating to attack the network, they'll generate the longest chain and outpace attackers.
Which does this imply? It implies that CPUs offer a more dispersed mining approach that can safeguard the network.
Yet, after reading this document again, we quickly see what Satoshi really meant:
In order to secure the network it is a need of more machines to do the work regardless of what hardware those machines utilizes. These machines can, eventually, be accumulated by the larger and larger miners which will lead to more centralized network.
The BCH (Bitcoin Cash) Network was defended by many in the "Block Size Wars" as the genuine "disciple" of the original Bitcoin Network, and they have every right to do so given what Satoshi stated in one of his responses in the Bitcoin Talk Forum back in 2010 when the network was still in its infancy:
The same persons might also support the following claim:
The block size was added to the Bitcoin Network later as a defense against DoS (Denial of Service) attacks; he later remarked on the aforementioned idea.
Yet, we still need to witness something that goes beyond Bitcoin's evolution, namely, the Bitcoin idea (to disrupt the Banking Financial System and not to become one). The one megabyte was a fantastic solution, and it could have been increased over time or for all eternity. However, a hard fork must be performed in order to increase the Block Size of a set of transactions and accommodate new developments; otherwise, Bitcoin will no longer be THE BITCOIN, as was the case with Bitcoin XT and Bitcoin Cash.
A few months before he "disappeared," Satoshi realized that developers may possibly have a negative impact on Bitcoin's future development and could also stray from its guiding principles and/or ideology. As a result, he made the following statement:
"If two developers can fork Bitcoin and succeed in redefining what "Bitcoin" is, in the face of widespread technical criticism and through the use of populist tactics, then I will have no choice to declare Bitcoin a failed project. - Satoshi (allegedly)"
You would wonder, therefore, what's the point of all this argumentation.
We must comprehend the following details in order to determine whether Monero is the Bitcoin's legacy:
To begin with, Satoshi was unaware of how conflicting viewpoints could undermine the primary goal of a "Peer to Peer Electronic Currency System." This indicates that different people have opinions that differ from his own notion of "Financial Independence," making the Bitcoin an entirely distinct idea that could end up becoming a branch of the banks.
Secondly, since there were no ASIC (application-specific integrated circuit) machines back then and all mining was done through a central processing unit, Satoshi was never aware that the Bitcoin Network might turn into a more centralized mining operation, which could ultimately destroy the "Financial Freedom ideology."
Lastly, Satoshi understood that developers needed to be dedicated to the "freedom spirit" if they wanted a Payment Network to operate as it should without straying from the heart of the idea of no third-party intrusion. Forking Bitcoin onto a distinct but superior network does not necessarily equate to "Financial Independence."
Just consider the impact on creative freedom if the Network would not restart from a Genesis Block following the hard fork, but rather from the most recent Fork Block. In addition, all miners would receive the same number of bitcoin as they had before the fork. Does everyone who is joining the network as a miner think this is fair? Definitely not! Sometime later, Satoshi Nakamoto saw that his original idea for Bitcoin had failed.
After that, nobody publicly knew anything about him, with the exception of a few early Bitcoin engineers like Mike Hern, who published his correspondence with Satoshi between 2009 and 2011 in 2017. Satoshi Nakamoto stated in his most recent email:
"I've since changed my focus. Gavin and everyone else is taking wonderful care of it."
There is now a debate that dates back to 2013 over the possibility that Satoshi Nakamoto is Nicolas van Saberhagen, the man responsible for Monero. Very likely, most of you have heard about it, but for those of you who are unaware of this Crypto, here is a brief description and some background information...
Another debate that has been going on for two years is that there is a striking coincidence between Satoshi's disappearance in 2011 and Steve Jobs' passing, which also happened in 2011, a few months after Satoshi's final email. Also, a Bitcoin white paper that would suggest Steve is Satoshi is reportedly present in the Mac Books.
I would tend to discount this later point, mostly since I looked into my Mac 2013 model and couldn't discover a single item... This is the directory route if you want to check it out:
open /System/Library/Image\ Capture/Devices/VirtualScanner.app/Contents/Resources/simpledoc.pdf
I have no idea if it is true or not, but it seems more likely to me that a disgruntled developer was able to sneak a copy of the Bitcoin paper into the Mojave OS (up until the most recent OS).
I'll compare Monero and Bitcoin in part 2, and we'll see if Monero is "the ideal crypto mining option for individuals?".
By the way, I would love to know whether you have any documentation proving that you have downloaded the Bitcoin white paper to your Macs.
If you want to achieve YouTube monetization the fastest way, you can use our complete course on «How to Create a YouTube Channel and Post Videos Using Only AI», it teaches you step-by-step how to achieve monetization and how you can learn all the insider tips and tricks for successful YouTube content creation.