Regarding your question about mining Bitcoin, I don’t exactly understand all of the details, but “mining” is the process of bringing new Bitcoins into existence. It is done by processing extremely long and convoluted computer algorithms (sometimes referred to as solving math problems) that need to be performed to track and verify all of the Bitcoin transactions. This has to be done by multiple independent computers to verify accuracy and prevent counterfeiting. The results of this tracking and verification are logged in what is called the Blockchain. The owners of the computers that are the first (or otherwise predominantly successful) to update the blockchain are rewarded with new Bitcoins (or actually a fraction of a Bitcoin), thus the total number of Bitcoins in existence continues to grow. However, theoretically there is a limit to the total number of Bitcoins that can ever be brought into existence. But I have never heard a good explanation of what incentive the computer owners will have to continue maintaining the blockchain once that limit is reached (which I think is projected to be about 10-15 years from now). The blockchain is separate and distinct from Bitcoin, but most people, including many Bitcoin fans and owners, don’t understand the distinction. The whole process is very power intensive. The most successful miners have dozens or hundreds of interconnected computers. The electrical power consumed by all of the computers maintaining the blockchain is greater than that consumed by Norway.
I am not a fan of cryptocurrencies for many reasons, the main one being that they have an intrinsic value of zero, and most or all of them will eventually achieve that value, or close to it. If the electrical grid ever goes down indefinitely, which is a very real possibility, they will reach that intrinsic value instantaneously. (Federal Reserve Notes also have zero intrinsic value, but their use is mandated by law. Cryptocurrencies are not mandated by law, and may eventually be prohibited or heavily regulated by law.) Peter Schiff periodically discusses Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies in general. He explains their problems very well, better than I can. It is true that some people were lucky, or smart enough to anticipate the Bitcoin bubble, and have made a lot of money on Bitcoin. But if they don’t sell while they are ahead they are going to lose that money when the bubble collapses. Even if there is a need for some cryptocurrencies to exist indefinitely, there is no inherent reason Bitcoin needs to survive. There are literally thousands of cryptocurrencies in existence already. The only advantage that Bitcoin has over most of the others is that it was the first, or one of the first, but that will mean little in the long run. Bitcoin’s value is almost exclusively determined by faith. When that faith dissipates, which can happen from something as innocuous as a tweet, Bitcoin will collapse.
Why, bc the US has spent the last 120 years trying to undo the Russian Revolution & succeeded in 1989. For the last 31 years the US has been trying, once & for all, to surround Russia & China to achieve nuclear 1st strike capability & force the Russian & Chinese economies back into the control of Wall Street that was lost in 1917 & 1948. If we would stop expanding NATO to the Russian border & take control of the seas on China’s east coast the hacking & election interference would stop. The Russians won WWII & if they hadn’t we would be living under a Chancellor Trump for the last 30+ years.
Regarding your question about mining Bitcoin, I don’t exactly understand all of the details, but “mining” is the process of bringing new Bitcoins into existence. It is done by processing extremely long and convoluted computer algorithms (sometimes referred to as solving math problems) that need to be performed to track and verify all of the Bitcoin transactions. This has to be done by multiple independent computers to verify accuracy and prevent counterfeiting. The results of this tracking and verification are logged in what is called the Blockchain. The owners of the computers that are the first (or otherwise predominantly successful) to update the blockchain are rewarded with new Bitcoins (or actually a fraction of a Bitcoin), thus the total number of Bitcoins in existence continues to grow. However, theoretically there is a limit to the total number of Bitcoins that can ever be brought into existence. But I have never heard a good explanation of what incentive the computer owners will have to continue maintaining the blockchain once that limit is reached (which I think is projected to be about 10-15 years from now). The blockchain is separate and distinct from Bitcoin, but most people, including many Bitcoin fans and owners, don’t understand the distinction. The whole process is very power intensive. The most successful miners have dozens or hundreds of interconnected computers. The electrical power consumed by all of the computers maintaining the blockchain is greater than that consumed by Norway.
I am not a fan of cryptocurrencies for many reasons, the main one being that they have an intrinsic value of zero, and most or all of them will eventually achieve that value, or close to it. If the electrical grid ever goes down indefinitely, which is a very real possibility, they will reach that intrinsic value instantaneously. (Federal Reserve Notes also have zero intrinsic value, but their use is mandated by law. Cryptocurrencies are not mandated by law, and may eventually be prohibited or heavily regulated by law.) Peter Schiff periodically discusses Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies in general. He explains their problems very well, better than I can. It is true that some people were lucky, or smart enough to anticipate the Bitcoin bubble, and have made a lot of money on Bitcoin. But if they don’t sell while they are ahead they are going to lose that money when the bubble collapses. Even if there is a need for some cryptocurrencies to exist indefinitely, there is no inherent reason Bitcoin needs to survive. There are literally thousands of cryptocurrencies in existence already. The only advantage that Bitcoin has over most of the others is that it was the first, or one of the first, but that will mean little in the long run. Bitcoin’s value is almost exclusively determined by faith. When that faith dissipates, which can happen from something as innocuous as a tweet, Bitcoin will collapse.
Why, bc the US has spent the last 120 years trying to undo the Russian Revolution & succeeded in 1989. For the last 31 years the US has been trying, once & for all, to surround Russia & China to achieve nuclear 1st strike capability & force the Russian & Chinese economies back into the control of Wall Street that was lost in 1917 & 1948. If we would stop expanding NATO to the Russian border & take control of the seas on China’s east coast the hacking & election interference would stop. The Russians won WWII & if they hadn’t we would be living under a Chancellor Trump for the last 30+ years.
The Russians have every reason to hack anything they can.