Bitcoins - digital currency
Bitcoin is a peer-to-peer digital currency. Peer-to-peer (P2P) means that there is no central authority to issue new money or keep track of transactions. Instead, these tasks are managed collectively by the nodes of the network. Advantages:
- Bitcoins can be sent easily through the Internet, without having to trust middlemen.
- Transactions are designed to be computationally prohibitive to reverse.
- Be safe from instability caused by fractional reserve banking and central banks. The limited inflation of the Bitcoin system’s money supply is distributed evenly (by CPU power) throughout the network, not monopolized by banks.
Total size 5,811,700 BTC
or 4,585,431 USD
or 3,545,137 EUR
or 133,094,323 RUB
or 3,849 ounces of gold
Any value to this idea or will it never work?
K all i'm saying is the halving run up has logical reasons based on how bitcoin works. There was a functional explanation.
All I'm asking is if that functional explanation should make way less sense when there's almost no coins left to mine. Is that not more or less at least a consideration?
I think it's more of a function of how much it costs to make bitcoin.
The difficulty has gone up since halving.
Meaning miners are paying more money to generate half as much bitcoin.
I think that's a more important metric to look at than % of existing supply generated.
serious question, if all industrial miners decided to stop and it wasn't financially viable so there were no replacements, you'd get an occasional guy who mines with their old PC but that's about it, would the ecosystem collapse?
serious question, if all industrial miners decided to stop and it wasn't financially viable so there were no replacements, you'd get an occasional guy who mines with their old PC but that's about it, would the ecosystem collapse?
I'm not sure what you mean by 'ecosystem collapse' but if a large % of hash power went offline and no one else really mined, I think price would go down substantially. I think hash rate is very correlated with price.
It would also take forever for an old PC to mine, so no new blocks wound be generated. In that sense, yes it would collapse.
There's data out there on the current cost to generate per bitcoin, given various electricity costs, but I think it's around $20k (don't quote me - haven't looked in a while) so miners are still making good money. I also don't think that takes into account the fees generated on top of the coinbase reward, and fees have been quite good lately. At least they were for a week or so after halving. May have calmed down a bit
K all i'm saying is the halving run up has logical reasons based on how bitcoin works. There was a functional explanation.
All I'm asking is if that functional explanation should make way less sense when there's almost no coins left to mine. Is that not more or less at least a consideration?
When there are almost no coins left to mine, and demand is just getting started, a major supply squeeze begins.
People still have no real concept of what true scarcity is either.
People ape in around the halving because they are dumb and think the price is going to magically double or rocket up. When it doesn't happen, they get disillusioned and paper hand.
The effects of receiving half the mining rewards typically don't get seen for 6-12 months post halving. The year of the halving isn't the one to watch. It's the year following that has historically been the big run up.
We'll see if history repeats, but I'm generally bullish on 2025. We're also in a 'then they fight us'
Rate cuts have effectively been priced out until 2025. Should provide some nice gasoline for the bubble peak along with expected $2 trillion budget deficits and money printers brrrrrrrr’ing as QE/liquidity increases.
Would be perfectly happy to chop for 6 months a la post-2020 halving from May - October.
In a room of 100 people, you will know more about money than 98 of them after watching this video. https://youtu.be/jk_HWmmwiAs?si=peOeAZwY...
It's got seriously good animations too.
I think it's more of a function of how much it costs to make bitcoin.
The difficulty has gone up since halving.
Meaning miners are paying more money to generate half as much bitcoin.
I think that's a more important metric to look at than % of existing supply generated.
You seem to be flipping what is the cause and what is the effect. The cost to mine doesn't affect price, price affects the cost to mine.
You seem to be flipping what is the cause and what is the effect. The cost to mine doesn't affect price, price affects the cost to mine.
Price has no direct effect on the cost to mine because a price did not exist for the first 10 months or so of Bitcoin’s existence. Difficulty + electricity determines the production cost.
Price can have an indirect effect, by encouraging more miners to join the network which will raise the difficulty and total energy cost to mine the next block, but there is no direct correlation between price and production cost.
If hash rate and energy prices remain constant and Bitcoin’s price doubles, the cost to mine the next block is still the same.
well... after 77 days straight of selling/net outflows by Grayscale, there was a 65 million dollar BTC inflow.
oh how the tides have turned.
Then suddenly.
Price has no direct effect on the cost to mine because a price did not exist for the first 10 months or so of Bitcoin’s existence. Difficulty + electricity determines the production cost.
Price can have an indirect effect, by encouraging more miners to join the network which will raise the difficulty and total energy cost to mine the next block, but there is no direct correlation between price and production cost.
If hash rate and energy prices remain constant and Bitcoin’s price doubles, the cos
You said I was wrong, said why I was right, then provided an irrelevant hypothetical
HFSP
serious question, if all industrial miners decided to stop and it wasn't financially viable so there were no replacements, you'd get an occasional guy who mines with their old PC but that's about it, would the ecosystem collapse?
Unlikely. The difficulty to mine a block adjusts every 2,016 blocks, or approximately every two weeks, based on the time it took to mine the previous 2,016 blocks. If the blocks were mined too quickly, the difficulty increases; if mining was too slow, the difficulty decreases.
What you'd have here is the difficulty would eventually decrease so low that a PC could mine a block and earn that reward. As long as the block rewards + fees > cost to mine, someone has the financial incentive to mine those blocks.
Unlikely. The difficulty to mine a block adjusts every 2,016 blocks, or approximately every two weeks, based on the time it took to mine the previous 2,016 blocks. If the blocks were mined too quickly, the difficulty increases; if mining was too slow, the difficulty decreases.
What you'd have here is the difficulty would eventually decrease so low that a PC could mine a block and earn that reward. As long as the block rewards + fees > cost to mine, someone has the financial incentive to mine tho
thanks, this is exactly what i was looking for
wasn't sure how flexible the magnitude of difficulty was so was just wondering if it could ever reach a point where price + difficulty no longer made it feasible for the large mining operations
Unlikely. The difficulty to mine a block adjusts every 2,016 blocks, or approximately every two weeks, based on the time it took to mine the previous 2,016 blocks. If the blocks were mined too quickly, the difficulty increases; if mining was too slow, the difficulty decreases.
What you'd have here is the difficulty would eventually decrease so low that a PC could mine a block and earn that reward. As long as the block rewards + fees > cost to mine, someone has the financial incentive to mine tho
If there were, say, 1,000 blocks remaining until the next difficulty adjustment, and the major mining operations all shut down as in the hypothetical, it would take a really long time to complete those 1,000 blocks, right? I wonder what the impact of that would be.
I’m not sure what the precise relationship between hashrate and time is (e.g. is it basically linear?).
Unlikely. The difficulty to mine a block adjusts every 2,016 blocks, or approximately every two weeks, based on the time it took to mine the previous 2,016 blocks. If the blocks were mined too quickly, the difficulty increases; if mining was too slow, the difficulty decreases.
What you'd have here is the difficulty would eventually decrease so low that a PC could mine a block and earn that reward. As long as the block rewards + fees > cost to mine, someone has the financial incentive to mine tho
If the bolded happened, wouldn't all the current big miners be busto?
Unlikely. The difficulty to mine a block adjusts every 2,016 blocks, or approximately every two weeks, based on the time it took to mine the previous 2,016 blocks. If the blocks were mined too quickly, the difficulty increases; if mining was too slow, the difficulty decreases.
What you'd have here is the difficulty would eventually decrease so low that a PC could mine a block and earn that reward. As long as the block rewards + fees > cost to mine, someone has the financial incentive to mine tho
Problem is that if the difficulty gets too low then attacks on the network become cheap as well. You don't want state actors to start double spending or exclude transaction just to make bitcoin unattractive.
I guess it’s why the price of bitcoin prevent the difficulty to go to low .
Especially in countries where energy prices are very low .
U could have industries burning waste but creating clean energy from it , plugging a bitcoin miners on it ?
As bitcoin gets higher , I doubt difficulty going too low can ever happen .
If there were, say, 1,000 blocks remaining until the next difficulty adjustment, and the major mining operations all shut down as in the hypothetical, it would take a really long time to complete those 1,000 blocks, right? I wonder what the impact of that would be.
I’m not sure what the precise relationship between hashrate and time is (e.g. is it basically linear?).
The difficulty would adjust sharply downward, and if those miners were to rejoin the network they would mine blocks at a far faster rate than 10 minutes per block until the next difficulty adjustment.
You often see this leading up to the halving - miners want to quickly deploy as much hash as possible before the block reward is cut in half so average block time can be significantly faster than 10 minutes.
Ignored Bittrex US e-mails for the past year because how much could it be if I haven't missed it since 2017-2018 anyway. Figured it was like $300-$500 of shitcoins.
Had to do KYC all over again (even though nothing changed it still takes like a week) and missed the withdrawal deadline. Had to join the court claimants.
Just received the last of the nearly 1 full BTC I had on there from 2018.
Looked at old transactions, trading 4 BTC for shitcoins like ARK and NEO, 2 BTC for 2 BCH....so gross. Lesson learned on not your keys not your cheddar, trading pairs, hard:soft.
