That is not why it is interesting to me.
Well, unfortunately, as we all know a lot of people are in the bitcoin space just to make money, with barely having interest in the technology itself. It's not even true. (I challenge you to explain it using real economic theory).
Which one specifically? I'm definitely nowhere being an expert in economics, but isn't the law of supply and demand pretty straightforward? "Law of supply and demand" is a thing, but what you are calling "supply" is not supply. It is production.There is no law of production and demand. You can twist meanings by calling it "new supply" or "supply of new coins", but in the end it is not supply. The number of bitcoins (also called "supply", unfortunately) is constantly increasing toward 21 million, and the halvings slow down the increase. As the number of bitcoins increases, the bitcoins available for sale, the "supply", also increases. Since the number of bitcoins is always increasing, so is the supply. |
|
|
|
Why is halving so interesting to anyone involved in any way with Bitcoin? The reason is very simple, everything is really in the numbers I cited above, and the bottom line is that it would reduce the amount of new BTC while increasing or holding current demand could lead to an increase in price. That's exactly what happened in the previous two halvings, so most are reasonably hoping the same will happen a third time.
That is not why it is interesting to me. It's not even true. (I challenge you to explain it using real economic theory). Anyway the reason it is interesting for me: 1. It is a reminder to everyone that the bitcoin supply is fixed, and it can never be inflated away by central banks or governments. 2. It is an event that gives everyone a reason to celebrate the continuing success of bitcoin. Happy Halving Day! |
|
|
|
Alot of newbies fall under the influence of "the halving gusto" and I think it good they be forewarned/corrected.
It's also called being drunk on hopium and following the wishful thinking investment strategy. The rewards will be halved, so the supply from the miners will be halved. Miners need to sell btc always because of maintaining their cost. So, the total supply will be decreased which will create more inequality in demand/supply which in short time possibly create significant price pump.
That is a popular misconception. The bitcoin supply is always increasing, even with the halving. The halving does not reduce the number of bitcoins. It reduces the rate at which the number of bitcoin increases. The supply consists of the bitcoins available for sale. As the number of bitcoin increases, so does the supply. The number of bitcoins is always increasing (even with the halving), therefore the supply of bitcoins is always increasing. |
|
|
|
There has two categories of mining business which are:
1. Mining Solo and
2. Mining in Pool.
The first form is simply when a miner mines as an individual. He bear the cost of buying the equipment needed to mine.
The advantage of this form of mining is that the miner will keep all the reward to himself while the disadvantage is that it may take longer time to mine a block.
The second form of mining is when group of miners come together and mine together in order to obtained faster and better result.
The advantage of this is that the it takes shorter time to mine a block and the disadvantage is that the proceed or reward is shared among the participating miners which will make the payment smaller compared to the solo miner.
Solo miners and pool miners buy the same equipment. The advantage of pool mining is that payouts are more frequent (but lower, so that the total is the same). This makes revenue more predictable. The disadvantage is that the miner generally pays the pool operator a fee. Pools also centralize Bitcoin to some extent.. Note that the terms "miner" and "mining" are ambiguous with respect to solo vs. pooled mining. There are two important components of mining -- constructing and publishing the block and hashing. A solo miner does both, but a pool miner just does the hashing while the pool operator constructs and publishes the block. The choice between the two comes down to how long you can wait between payouts. Solo mining is more profitable because there is no pool operator taking a fee, but you have to manage the operating costs while you are waiting for a payout. |
|
|
|
Either way, I don't appreciate being called a liar when I've been nothing but truthful about being friends with Satoshi on Ning.
I see what you did there. |
|
|
|
I did not bother to read the whole thread, which is now nearly 10 pages. Did I miss anything?
Yes, you did. The thread is 10 pages because there is stuff going on here, despite the ridiculous title. Tagged this user named Etar for intellectual dishonesty/trying to fool newbies. Do not forget this:
You are wrong. You didn't bother to read the thread and you just copy-pasted gmaxwell's undeserved negative trust. Etar doesn't deserve the negative trust.He claimed rates that are clearly impossible, but that is because his measurement methodology is flawed. He was not lying or trying to misrepresent anything. He was just wrong. The fact that I challenged him to find 16 specific private keys in a 2 64 range and he succeeded clearly demonstrates that he has accomplished something. If you want to know the details, you'll have to read the thread. |
|
|
|
Ok thanks, I just want to earn some bitcoins, delete my Wallet, save my keys and then after some years spend them
Write down the seed, keep it somewhere secure and don't forget you left it there or what it's for! Why the seed? Isn't the seed just something related with Electrum? The bitcoins held in your wallet may be stored in many addresses. All of those addresses come from the seed, so rather than tracking down all of the addresses and and their keys, it is safer and easier to save the seed instead. You might want to put it in a drawer or your wallet and have a few additional copies.
Don't keep the seed with you. You are likely to lose it or someone might find it. Store it somewhere very safe, like in a safe. |
|
|
|
As for the satoshi never using Bitcointalk, that is misleading. The forum is the same, but the hosting, name, ownership, and URL all changed a couple times early on. When satoshi was posting, it wasn't called Bitcointalk and it wasn't at bitcointalk.org. There were (are) multiple people using the login to bitcointalk.org.
Your story is showing some cracks. Bitcointalk.org didn't exist until several months after satoshi's last login. Last Active: December 13, 2010, 04:45:41 PM Creation Date: 2011-06-24T05:19:00Z |
|
|
|
What I'm curious about is how low is the difficulty will be when all bitcoin has been mined? Is it low enough to make the bitcoin network become vulnerable?
That is the real question. The security against a 51% attack is based on the cost of mining, and that will be determined by the revenue from transaction fees. Right now, fees average about $20k USD per day. If there were no subsidy, then that's how much it would cost for a successful 51% attack against Bitcoin today. |
|
|
|
I disagree with those who say that transactions fees will be enough to incentivize miners to keep mining.
Even if 1 bitcoin will be worth millions of dollars, users will always pay cents for transactions fees and because the number of transactions that can be contained in a block is limited, fees will not be enough to cover miners expenses.
You don't know that fees won't be enough to incentivize miners because you don't know what the fees will be. You are making a big assumption. Besides, Bitcoin is designed to always be profitable for at least some miners through the difficulty mechanism and the economics of mining. |
|
|
|
Most of us don't have to worry about it because Bitcoin will either be worth a lot of money or nothing before it's mined out completely.
The effects of the halvings will start to show within the next several years. You don't have to wait until 2140. The subsidy will drop below 1 BTC in a little more than 10 years. Mining a block costs up to $45k USD (after this halving), but the subsidy will only be about $6k in 3 more halvings (assuming a constant price). |
|
|
|
|
I didn't read the article (sorry), but it seems to me that deflation, by definition, can't be good for the price of a bitcoin. No matter how you spin it, deflation means that the values of assets (including Bitcoin) fall compared to the currency.
|
|
|
|
|
Simple fractional reserve banking works like this:
The bank has $100 in deposits -- $10 in reserves and $0 in loans, so $90 more can be lent.
The bank loans $90 to A who purchases something from B, and B deposits the $90.
The bank now has $190 in deposits -- $19 in reserves, $90 in loans, so $81 more can be lent.
The bank loans $81 to C who purchases something from D, and D deposits $81.
The bank now has $271 in deposits -- $27 in reserves, $171 in loans, so $73 more can be lent.
The bank loans $73 to E who purchases something from F, and F deposits $73.
The bank now has $344 in deposits -- $34 in reserves, $244 in loans, so $66 more can be lent.
...
The bank now has $1000 in deposits -- $100 in reserves, $900 in loans, so no more can be lent.
Now, loans are constantly being paid off so withdrawals can be accommodated. However, if withdrawals are made too quickly, the bank can run out of money (because it is all tied up in loans) and collapse. One way that banks avoid running out of money is by borrowing excess reserves from other banks.
|
|
|
|
When the miners and traders still hold their bitcoins, and they don't sell in a big amount in the exchange (means the supply at the exchange is not high), and if many people want to buy bitcoin in a large amount (means the demand at the exchange is high), then that will make the price can increase. Because in one side, people will buy bitcoin at any price, and in the other side, people don't want to sell their bitcoin at a low price, so they will still hold the bitcoin amount and waiting for the highest price.
Perhaps, but none of that has anything to do with the halving. |
|
|
|
I read your official publication. It is a bunch of mumbo-jumbo and contains no intelligible information. After 4000 runtime hours (Approx 2 Billion private key generations and searches) we have successfully identified a private key with a positive balance of 69BTC.
That's a bold claim, can you support it? Our rule simply reduces the total amount of private keys needing brute force through an identified pattern.
Here's a pattern you missed: The first character is 5 or L or K. You don't have to try any others. T(n) = b ÷ 2T(n/2) + bn if n>2
Without context, that is meaningless. |
|
|
|
No. The halving does not reduce the supply. I wish people would stop repeating such a gross misunderstanding of basic economics.
The supply that I mean is the rewards for the miners. The supply will not change, but the rewards for miners will be changed so that I called that is the supply. I hope you are not misunderstanding  Ok, so you have your own definition for "supply". It's confusing, but ok. ... while the supply that the miners and the traders sell is not high, then that means, the price will increase.
Why do you say that this supply is not high? As I mentioned before, it is always increasing. |
|
|
|
Here is exactly what he said, with no twisting. ...
And then I said, "supposing you brought the light inside the body?", which you can do either through the skin or in some other way. And I think you said you are going to test that too. Sounds interesting.
Right, and then I see the disinfectant where it knocks it out in a minute -- one minute. And, is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning? Because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs. So, it would be interesting to check that -- so that you are going to have to use medical doctors. But it sounds interesting to me.
...
Simply beginning a previous sentence with "supposing" doesn't change the meaning of the rest of what he said. Trump is clearly out of his league here. I don't know if he is smarter or dumber than previous presidents, but he likes to talk and that gets him in trouble. “It's better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than open it and remove all doubt.” ― Mark Twain |
|
|
|
|
I think your analysis may be flawed.
Any miners paying the average cost (or more) for electricity won't make a profit and will stop mining. As a result, only those miners with a very low electricity cost are going to mine. Using the average cost of electricity in your analysis misrepresents the actual situation.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
