hashing power COSTS is a separate value that sits below the price.
PRICE is speculative above hashing power costs. its why for majority of 2018 when hashing power costs were $5800 the PRICE never went below that.
then in OCTOBER when asic farms sold off asics cheap, thus reducing the hashing power cost as new more efficient asics were entering the arena.. the PRICE in NOVEMBER occured

majority of miners do not increase their hashpower when the price moves up. hense why there was no large hashpower rise in the january period of 2018
majority of hash power rises when they deem fit to rise. and then the mining:market effect plays out

the mining:market dynamic has been something known about for nearly a decade in btc and for centuries in the mineral/metals markets.

if it costs $1 to make. no one will go to a market and buy it for $100, unless getting it from the market has a $99 convenience feel that makes it FEEL worthy of paying extra

if it costs $100 to make. no one will mine it if they can buy it for $90, unless getting it from mining has a $10 convenience feel that makes it FEEL worthy of paying extra

if you chart mining cost vs price of summer 2018 you will see EFFICIENT mining cost of $5800. which is why before the october s9->s15 hashdrama .. no one sold below $5800 as that was the underlying support of the mining:market dynamic
th price only moved down when it was cheaper to mine
(no im not talking about hobby miners in thir basement on 10cent-20cent electric who paid full price retail for asics im talking the majority of miners (who are smart/resourceful to get cheap electric and cheap asics))


governments wont hold btc. they have a contract with banks to keep fiat in play. this is why governments are working with banks to make hyperledger.
hyper ledger is the united committee of banks and governments.
governments dont even hold gold.

governments do not create fiat. banks do. governments ask banks for fiat and then give the banks back returns plus interest
you need to research more into bonds (credit agreements essentially)
governments do not have an endless money pit.

the 2008 crises is where governments did not make fiat to pay bank bailouts. what actually happened was that governments asked banks to create their own fiat. where for minutes. banks gave fiat to government and then government gave it back to the bank(like how mortgages work) and the government will then pay the bank interest for the next couple decades
you need to learn more about the whole promissory note(bonds):credit agreement/mortgages of how fiat is created

but in short. hyperledger is not some altcoin script kiddy venture. hyperledger is the bank/government R&D project for their own currency system(s)

1. no i am not saying the PRICE is tied to production cost
i am saying the UNDERLYING VALUE is linked to mining cost

2. as for the 'majority' of miners. they do not mine at 6cent-20cent electric and paying $1450 for asics.
the majority get cheap electric at under 6cents electric and they get bulk discount or cheap asics due to being the manufacturers or know manufacturers enough to get discounts
those mining with only a couple asics and doing it from their own home are not productive because they have not found the cheapest solutions. they are just hobby mining and not the serious majority. yes you will hear hobby miners complain they are not making profit but out of the millions of asics. hobby mining is not that much

3. the UNDERLYING VALUE is UNDERLYING. it is NOT the price. it is a value below the price that makes up the SUPPORT where people refuse to sell below.

take 2018
    /\
   /  \
  /    \/\/\   __/\   ___
 /  _____\/____\/__/\\
/_/                             \\//

underlying value was at $5800 which is why for the majority of 2018 the price did not go below $5800.
then in october a mass sell off of old S9's occured (cheap second hand prices) making it cheaper to mine as new s15's were also being tested. so the underlying value went down which caused the november 2018 price movement to go down

4. PoS have no ongoing cost. . the initial 'stake' is not a ongoing cost. you dont lose it so you get to keep the 'stake' when you decide you dont want to mine. unlike paying for electric which is an ongoing cost.

5. as for thinking btc should turn to PoS. there are many issues
a. exchanges hoarding many large addresses of 50k coins+ will win block signing the most
b. signing blocks is not as secure as the hashing mechanism of mining
c. hobbiests that just buy PoS coins at speculative prices and stake it have no ongoing cost. but due to exchanges who also have no costs but do have huge hoards, means that hobbiests wont be getting rich.

real world analogy
PoW is people working for the cheque clearing house and getting paid a salary for their labour costs
PoS is people just putting funds into a chequeing account hoping for some interest payment

the thing about PoS is if there are many addresses with 50,000 coins. and then 50k addresses with 1coin each. the stake threshold would be above 1coin  so all those holding just one coin wont even meet the stake requirement so wont get anything.
like bank accounts. have below $100 in an account. dont expect any interest. have $500k+ expect to have a high interest account

some argue that PoS has a underlying cost because people need to fund the stake. but they can take the stake back out.
PoS is pure SPECULATION
PoW has underlying costs

in short. any hobbiest who is crying they cant get a good electric/asic deals to be competitive mining PoW.. will also find they dont have the funds to stake(savings account) enough to be competitive PoS

this is why PoS users end up 'pooling' their stake and trusting they will get shares of a pooled address. yet the practice of this is still not a good security for the network nor good self control of your funds

in short. hobbiests that think they can get rich for nothing or from their home PC's doing little work or little effort will be sadly wokn up to the truth that they are not making profit

ask yourself this. for a few months it cost $100 to mine a mineral. then some scientist found a way to create the mineral in a lab for one cent.

would you still value it at $100. or just buy the stuff at 1cent and laugh at the ones that paid $100
what happens is real cost value. turns to speculative value.

dont think of the price as the value. think of the underlying real value as a bottom line that people wont sell below. and the speculative part is above it

EG
first 3 months price rises to $100 due to POW cost rise, then when PoS activates, speculation takes over thats random
    _
   /  \
  //|  \
 // |    \   /\/\/\
//  |___\/_____


in all assets you will find there is a underlying value which is the bottomline where generally everyone would refuse to sell below as its the bottom value where peoples costs outweigh any possible profits, so they will refuse to sell below.
the price is ABOVE the bottomline value as that is where people are profiting and thinking things are worth more than cost based on things like utility.

a PoS coin can only be priced more than a PoW coin if the utility of a PoS coin speculates as having more speculative utility(uses/features/popularity) than a PoW that has no utility which then causes the desire to mine a PoW to come down for costs to come down

many people have tried pump and dump groups.. the result turns out like this

privately whales pre-buy on the 28th
privately sharks pre-buy on the 29th
publicly the minnows (small fish) are told to buy on the 30th
...
whales sell on the 30th when minnows buy. whales profit
sharks might profit-lose when they realise what happened on the 30th/31st..average they break even
minnows lose on the 31st

    _/\
 _/    |
/        \
28 29 30 31
end result temporary price drama. nothing sustainable

i wonder why the OP is choosing January 30th. and im guessing its probably because the OP gets paid on like the 28th and wants to buy in BEFORE the date he chose

PoS coins have no cost of creation. meaning a PoS coins price has no underlying VALUE its just pure speculation
PoW coins have a cost of creation. meaning a PoW coins price has underlying VALUE

imagine it this way. gold has utility. but imagine it could be mined for just 10cents an ounce. everyone would mine it and try selling it for 11cents.
the reason gold costs $1k is because it costs to much to obtain it..
its basic market:mining dynamics of "whats the cheapest way to obtain something of utility"

PoS is only something people want because they want something for nothing.
PoS does not make a coin more secure. infact coins are less secure using PoS

the only cries i ever see about PoW is the cost of creation.. which if you remove your own personal greed you see it as a security benefit.

OP argues that bitcoin is a better SoV because its easier to use as a medium of exchange.
the foolish part is those that want to remove/inhibit/stall its MoE utility to be just a SoV

by removing/stalling/ sidestepping its MoV. by letting people play with promissory unconfirmed tx's on another network and requiring vaulting up coins to even use that other network. is not going to gain value of bitcoin.

vaulted up coins(8 decimals) locked in fortknox(factories) to then play with unaudited promissary transaction mediums(unconfirmed 12decimal tx's) is the same business plan of banks using paper money that 'represents' gold in the 18th century

many coins will have the same feature of using these other network mediums.
so with less bitcoin unique-ness and yet costing more for people to actually transact on the actual bitcoin network. people will not want to store value in bitcoin if it becomes cheaper to exit the other network via other coins.

people need to look beyond fluffy pony dreams and take a critical look at how things will play out.

store of value purely because store of value does not make store of value more valuable

1. you cant take Apple shares into an Apple store declaring you already own the products to just take them away.
    you cant take Apple patent for a certain chip into an Apple store declaring you own the products to just take them away.

2. bitcoin is an asset.
        this is because just like a patent, share, brand its not tangeable(physical object) but intellectual ownership.
        to say bitcoin is nothing is the same as saying brands, patents, shares are nothing.

3. the OP can make the same argument that fiat is nothing. that people need to convert products/services into value measured in fiat for fiat to have value.
bitcoin is the same it has an actual cost to its creation and people use it for products and services and vice versa

the argument can be expanded into anything tangeable(physical) and non tangeable(not physical). take cow manure. many think that it has no value and is nothing. yet if a farmer wants to give it utility by using it as fertiliser. then it gains utility which gives it value.

unlike 99.9% of PoS coins that have no coin creation costs and no infrustructure to sustain utility. bitcoin has both cost of creation and utility.

4. here is an argument that the OP should consider and understand and agree with

its all about cost of creation, utility.
this is why its important that bitcoin remains a medium of exchange. as oppose to just becoming a store of value for the sake of only being a store of value. as that would then make bitcoin worth nothing.
without a medium of exchange, miners wont want to use their costs to create it to then find they cant use it.
people wont want to buy it if they cant use it for anything
thus the cost of creation depletes as miners withdraw. as the utility will be gone that gives it some of its value in the first place. so thinking of bitcoin as becoming just a "store of value" without utility. will be a downfall of bitcoin.

but to suggest bitcoin is nothing. is to ignore its cost of creation and its medium of exchange currently

in 2012.. i got in. i seen price histories of cents-a couple$ so seeing $6 my mindset and many mindsets of people was $6 was "not cheap"

hindsight 7 years on is NOW.. that $6 was cheap. but at the time people did not think things were cheap as they couldnt predict the future

also what proof is there that craig wright got into bitcoin "early".
all i see is that he made some tulip trust of public keys that anyone can do
also his drama started in 2013+[mainly 2015 onwards].. not 2008-2012

so id say he had no bitcoin prior to 2012

lastly the most important part..
craig wright has nothing related to bitcoin. so can we just side line him as old boring social drama of 2015-2018... and not bring his name up again in 2019

just drawing lines and triangles on the price chart are meaningless.. thats not bitcoin analysis. thats not even technical analysis.
thats just dumb "trend" analysis. which i refer anyone who does this as trend anals.. not TA's(technical analysts)

but just using price data and thinking the price is the price because only the price is not anywhere close to technical analysis
anyone can draw any lines on a chart and randomly change the first point of a line to be 1 month or 12 months ago which will result in a different angle, leading to different results. so it becomes meaningless to base numbers on just lines drawn randomly on a price chart

instead do some technical analysis.
think about the mining:market dynamic which has always been at play. for the last 9+ years
its the game theory of "how to get BTC at the cheapeast price.. mining it or buying it"
even hal finney mentioned it in his first post on this forum.

heres a tip
look at the hashrate
(hashrate in october 2013(asics birth) sparked a upward movement that sparked the 2013 price movement)
(hashrate in october 2018(asics next gen 28thash swaps) sparked a downward movement that sparked the november 2018 price movement downward)

yes after the spark (reaction) alot of FOMO over extended the movement direction too much, which is called speculation. so dont expect to use hashrate as a guarantee minute by minute predictor.. speculation (volatile price) is varied compared to the underlying VALUE support

in short
unless we see a large hashrate dump. dont expect a supported price dump. as it cost X to mine btc, meaning if prices got too cheap people will buy more coin and correct the price back up to the mining:market dynamic

for the last 9+ years the price has always had a healthy price at or above the mining:market dynamic

the foolish mindset is when block rewards half. income halves
guess the OP has not done the research on mining:market dynamics.

in the foolish theory of bitcoin being stagnant at say $4k for 100 years (16 years of importance) would be where miners would really want to push fee's up or they will just not mine as much

but while rewards are at play as the main income. the price will move to take into account the halving

...
then comes the foolish notion of a government/bank using bitcoin as a reserve. its foolish because a bank/government will have hyperledger as their backbone of their own reserve currency(s). so its not a thing to think bitcoin will become a bank/government reserve

but essentially if the deflationary nature and the mining:market dynamic were not at play (which the OP theorises) then people just mine less. difficulty drops and it then becomes profitable to mine more easily.

in short government/banks wont subsidize bitcoin.
seems the OP thinks bitcoin would become a "one world government reserve" because he thinks that because his buddies told him so, must make it true.

OP needs to do some proper research and run real scenarios.

on a serious side
1. if you believe anything wrote on wiki then your a fool
2. if your getting "snippets" and taking them as factual, your a fool
3. if you just take whatever you read first as factual, then your a fool

no wonder you and your buddies are stuck in an echo chamber

try doing real research...

plus going into the social drama of commenting about my replies instead of doing something about google results. shows your just a drama queen.

might be worth you going to wiki and edit the page
might be worth you going the snippet and providing feedback.
and then learn how to do proper research instead of just looking at sponsored snippets and top results

1. craig wright didnt get a crap tonne of coins in the early days.
2. craig wright made a FAKE trust and got lots of fiat and then had to leave australia to avoid civil lawsuits
3. the forks of cash were due to core devs not wanting certain things on bitcoin network so the cause was not a craig wright thing. but a core thing and then later craig wright jumped on the cash drama to pretend he is an influencer
4. the cash sv drama has nothing to do with bitcoin. and no arbitrage movement is show to have caused any bitcoin drama

what you need to learn is craig wright is just a public face and is just causing social drama much like adam back and adams team does.  

my top results

Bitcoin Core :: Team
https://bitcoincore.org/en/team/
The Bitcoin Core project has a large open source developer community with many casual contributors to the codebase. There are many more who contribute ...

Development - Bitcoin - Bitcoin.org
https://bitcoin.org/en/development
Jump to Bitcoin Core contributors - non-github-bitcoin. (271). Gregory Maxwell. (265). fanquake. (243) .... lucash-dev. (5). ericshawlinux. (5). paraipan. (4).
‎Code Review · ‎Starter Projects

seems i get better google results than you..
.. might explain many things about your research compared to mine

admitting panic causes more panic.

eg
investor admitting they'll buy X tomorrow causes everyone to buy X today, thus costing an investor more to buy X tomorrow
so investors only admit things after they have took their own action

JPMorgan dont want a bank run, until they themselves have got their own funds out

a hash is 32byte (64hex) which in binary is 256bit
                                     which in qubits is 128qubit
(though an asic hash thousands of chips per asic.. and thousands of asics.. QC just has one chip)

wage data is twisted by those earning $1mill salary now on $3mill salary.. but the other 99% of people earning $7.25 are now only earning $7.50-$10

so although the rich have 3x more to invest. average joe only has 0.3x

which with what is known as the baby boomers (population bloat after the ww2 who become adults in the 70's) now reaching retirement age. (lots of people were having more kids in the 50's-60's 'peace time')
where that extra 10% of population outside the norm will stop putting funds INTO retirement funds and instead be taking OUT from retirement funds.. far more than normal retirement output of a community

imagine it this way 9 people put $500 a year in for 50 years($45k a decade)
but in a certain generation there are 10 people putting in $500 a year for 50 years ($50k a decade)
in the hopes what you get out at retirement is ~10years of living worth 5x more then a decade(get back what they put in)
i simplified things to exclude inflation and other variables



as you can see the generation that has extra population will impact the 'moneypot' of retirement investment companies and also national treasuries of state pensions(social security pensions)

in this scenario. for a whole decade either:
A) retiree's income for the whole community takes a cut and they get 10% less than expected
or
B) the retirement investment firms/social security are at a loss of 25000 instead of a 5000 gain to balance the pot to give retiree's what is deserved

in short..
it wont be a housing/sub-prime loan trigger this time. which they can cancel out by just zero-ing debt of zero cost to hide impact
it would be a retirement fund trigger which they cant easily zero-out as the funds are not 'credit creation' this time.. but actual peoples investments/value

PoS coins have a zero cost of creation support value. the price is speculative of how pumped/promoted it is.

PoW coins have a cost of creation that gives it an underlying support. this has always been known factor even from th first year of bitcoin.

as for wanting to build your own 'crypto index' well thats just making a business that takes commission from getting people to buy/bet on a basket/group of altcoin..... nothing special there

no one actually cares about a crypto index. just like actual smart people dont care about 'market cap' as both things are essentially meaningless numbers.

if you were to make some revolutionary real world impacting exchange. here is an idea.
an exchange that does not measure coins in FIAT. but instead measures coins in 'minimum wage'/cost of living.

imagine it this way:
the fiat method. 1btc costs an american under 550 minimum labour hours to afford but somewhere like Afghanistan is like 8000 hours

the MW method. a coin is on the market at 550 MW. which an american can buy for the same 'value' but now the guy in the middle east only needs to work 550 hours to get 1btc.

the impact would be that americans would forex their dollars to buy afghanis so that the $->afs can buy them many btc. and cause the forex rate of usd/afs to swing where it brings middle easterners exchange rate up (due to forex arbitrage) to be more closer to 1:1 rather than 1:15

if they actually wasted time on brute forcing crypto it would be more negative impact on PoS.. but its not a threat yet as the processing power is still small in comparison to the 'collision attack' numbers required

EG to brute force a particular address would be billions of years even at 1000 tries a second using conventional systems. yet a crypto can change the algo before that where stakers can just move their stake to different tx formats every so often

quantum computing is so new they have not even got to a 'standard' where by they can start making operating systems using a quantum processor. so that shows how far they have to go

FTFY

violent protests are different than peaceful protests.

its the difference between the d-day landing...... vs woodstock

i fully understand that wanting to voice opinion should be allowed. i voice my opinion alot even when some others try to insult me hoping ill shut up because i am raising concerns about the buddies they want to protect.

but we have got to a point where protests are just loud opinions. and nothing more.
and when opinions and voices get ignored. some resort to vocal nd physical attack.

what people who want not just free speach but also political change. is to actually stop organising to just stand in a field/road with wooden signs. but instead with bits of paper that say to their local government representative

"if you do not address our concerns we will not vote for you again"

knowing in each area/zone/district there are only X amount of voters. a representative suddenly getting a couple thousand notes warning if he ignores a certain thing he wont get votes. is much more pressure than shouting down a street

so if you are a peaceful protestor and feel you voice is not being heard. dont double down by using violence instead try a different method of free speach(communication) while still peacefully protesting