Let see the options Mining VS investing in this early stage of the project.
build. 3 rigs with 5 gpus = $6000
buying $ 6000 in siacoins = 400,000 coins.
mining siacoins 400,000 with the 3 rigs 6 months.
the only advantage is if you build the rigs, then you can do dual mining lets say: Ethereum + siacoins = you'll be making about 25 Ethereums in 6 monts. the ethereums will pay for the equipment and you get 400,000 siacoins free. NICE.
I have just updated the blog post to reflect a change to the API - 'minimumXXX' is now 'minXXX'. These commands were changed when we upgraded to v1.0.0, but the blog post was never updated to reflect that.
minuploadbandwidthprice, minstorageprice, and mindownloadbandwidthprice are now the correct settings.
I was wondering where this kind of commentary was last year when the hollow men made all the noise. To me, it is obvious that a hard fork is not worth discussing.
By all means, a hard fork is an attack. Your afterthought is very important because a fork can hardly replace Bitcoin.
By any standards the legal consequence can only be,
§0 Bitcoin = treaty
§1 Bitcoin can not be changed (beyond changes allowed within the treaty)
If you where to replace it you would be in breach of the treaty. Thus the replacement is void.
I see one loophole left that could allow a fork to succeed Bitcoin. This would require that Bitcoin (see §0) is declared retroactive invalid (e.g. culpa in contrahendo doctrine, 'Schwebende Unwirksamkeit').
This would need an agreement between all participants.
I disagree, thus, not all participants agree, thus it is void. - Period.
Interestingly, I wonder if the Hague Conventions (or Geneva additions) apply mutatis mutandis. Otherwise the stronger will inevitably triumph.
PS: Those who would trade in their Bitcoin for temporary space on the Blockchain deserve neither.