https://media.tenor.com/hsBSy3ZpW2EAAAAC/what-the.gif

Why wouldn't you just use another pool. That's strange.

We never saw the 53% Attack coming.

Aren't miners supposed to migrate voluntarily to other pools?

The solution is that every bitcoiner needs to at minimum run an S9 and point at slushpool. Even if it is a net loss. The combined hash will add up.

https://cdn.nostr.build/i/c0d10171c572b6f26fb93fc9bf973e5dc200f4a58e54635b7aff295b6c3c31ec.gif

Get out https://images2.minutemediacdn.com/image/upload/c_fill,g_auto,h_1248,w_2220/v1555444250/shape/mentalfloss/jaws-hero.jpg?itok=HijmqJ_M

Reminds me of how the charts of staking pools look for shitcoins. I'm no Bitcoin magician, but it just doesn't look decentralized enough.

This is , like, not cool man.

They can switch whenever they want.

DCG and friends have ALWAYS been an enemy of Bitcoin

what are these miners getting in exchange? what's incentivising them not to switch? There are 2016 blocks every 2 weeks, surely income stability can't be a factor especially if you're a public miner and report quarterly earnings - even if you're a 1% hashrate pool that's about 262 blocks in a Q wit...