Transaction

j"1LAnZuoQdcKCkpDBKQMCgziGMoPC4VQUckM˜<div class="post"><div class="quoteheader"><a href="https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=721.msg7936#msg7936">Quote from: NewLibertyStandard on August 06, 2010, 07:20:47 PM</a></div><div class="quote">I had all four of my cores dedicated previously toward the goal of generating bitcoins, but it's no longer worth the cost to me. I am now only generating using one core but the goal is no longer to generate bitcoins. My current goal is to help maintain the strength of the network and to help the network recover (get to the next block adjustment) when and if a large botnet drops out. Bitcoin was about generating bitcoins, but now it's not. Now it's about competing botnets providing a secure and reliable foundation for an open currency. Yeah, they're stealing the electricity and yeah, they're profiting, but at least they're putting their stolen CPU cycles to a useful and accepted purpose instead of more harmful activities that they probably would be engaged in if they had not discovered bitcoin.<br/></div>Ok, bravo for an amazingly honest and straightforward answer. That is probably the most overall convincing argument I have seen made in the thread. You are arguing that the overall social utility of Bitcoin is "worth it" - worth both the raw energy cost of the computational work, and worth the regrettable fact that it provides a profit opportunity for botnet operators. I don't have a proposal for how exactly you measure the costs and benefits, but I entirely agree with your analysis of the bottom line of the situation. You could even make the argument that minting bitcoins as an activity is less harmful than other botnet activities like sending out spam. </div> text/html