Precisely. Those that choose not to constantly be barely profitable will hopefully sell off their equipment to cut their losses, and do so in such a way that those whose costs are lower and thus they are more likely to be profitable will scoop up the equipment.
Very good point that I unintentionally omitted
The be-all-end-all of pricing is mining profitability. Bitcoin's difficulty to meant to adjust according to mining activity. If there isn't enough mining going on to produce the mining rewards that should be awarded daily, the difficulty will quarter every two weeks until the rewards are enough to incentivize miners to continue doing so. So, mining operations might have to stop or turn down the heat in order to stay profitable at the current difficulty, and await the approximately bi-weekly adjustment of difficulty before resuming. However, that next adjustment might not be sufficient to restore profitability, so the stoppage or reduction might have to continue through multiple difficulty adjustments.
If mining farm operators didn't plan for this possibility, then they didn't think through the inevitabilities of Bitcoin enough to maintain their business and they are destined to flood the market with their mining hardware, thereby redistributing the mining hardware and decentralizing mining, as it arguably should be.
If the phrase "Your mom's first child node is not a text node", then you probably know AXL and I probably worked with you at some point in the last six years.
Which means that nothing has actually changed. They're just codifying the cultural practice that was already in place:
- No projects are guaranteed to deliver
- Show that you used the funds appropriately
- Give prorated refunds
- You may get sued at any point
I feel the same, and recognize that any person would and should be calling for the officer's head.
However, there was no criminal negligence or intent. That would be necessary to charge. He was operating within the law. Now, we citizens need to push for laws that hold officers to the same distracted driving standards that citizens are bound by, because those laws are based on human nature, not government edict.
Java is moving into archaic irrelevance faster than ever. That is, the language itself.
The JVM, however, is now more useful and relevant than it ever was. It used to be naught but an implementation detail. Now, rather, it's central to an entire ecosystem of languages that will inevitably send Java the way of C: used only when the greatest speed is necessary.
Scala is basically a next-generation Java. Java with functional programming, or really, vice versa. JRuby make Ruby actually scalable, given the presence of native threads and interoperability with existing enterprise libraries that commonly only ship in the form of Java or C# libraries. Clojure enables LISPers of yore and Schemers of new import explore functional programming as it used to be, without having to drop the wealth of Java libraries available. Ceylon, Groovy, Jython, and dozen of others are paving a way to give the JVM much more to do after Java becomes obsolete.
Java will never die - it'll just become like COBOL, Fortran, and C before it: used in enterprise software, operating systems, and outdated educational assessments.
Having a solid Contributor License Agreement process in place would probably be a good idea. That way, it's clear who owns the code that comes in and encourages people to contribute while defining a (necessary evil) process for doing so. You'll lose random passers-by, but just one passer-by who gets litigious could be more of a headache than it's worth.
The manufacturer, so that it breaks, and we have a reason to go buy another expensive one or get it repaired.
Collusion, I tell ya!
And now, if Twitter wants to, it can make Turkey play whack-a-mole by moving IPs every time one gets blocked...
So this is actually a test of the one of the attractive principles of Bitcoin: no one can separate you from your money, assuming that you control your private keys. Karpeles isn't a complete idiot, so I'm certain the keys to what balance he himself maintains are safely stored somewhere only he knows (brain wallet?). So, assuming that he has substantial holdings in bitcoin, then what good does the asset freeze do? He is free to spend bitcoin, unless the asset freeze also prevents businesses from accepting money of any kind from him.
Same holds for the two companies, but they are much more likely to have a larger USD balance that is actually affected by the freeze.
Methinks if Mr. Hiroshima had the funds available, or pro-bono lawyer stepped in, there's grounds for a lawsuit against at least PayPal if not also GoDaddy.