...
First of all, the current 10% inflation is temporary, it will go down gradually over time.
Sure, the next reward halving would cut it in half. Also cutting the security of the network in half by causing miners to shut down (remember--the cost of mining should approach the price of coins mined according to satoshi). Unless Bitcoin prices happen to double on that happy day. Secondly, the amount of resources and energy spent on mining reflects the demand for competition in control for transactions.
Mining has nothing to do with market cap in the long run, adjustable difficulty reflects the demand for control.
No, mining has everything to do with market cap, see above. Bitcoin's market cap is simply (price of BTC) * (total BTC in existence). Lower market cap means that each bitcoin is worth less. Would you spend $300 to mine a coin worth substantially less than $300? Sure mining depends on market cap. You don't need to mine Bitcoin in order to use it, you can make profit by providing services or doing some useful work.
That's true, though not relevant to this conversation. The beauty of PoW is that money and control are separate. They must be, as they are two different archetypes. Things you cannot buy with money, you get through control. Keeping them separate ensures the competition for both.
Not sure what you're trying to say. |
|
|
|
[butthurt]
Ornery, foul-mouthed old geezer, ain't ya? No reason to be upset, Gramp #2--I'm not here to manipulate the price, that's your paranoid dementia talking. I make money on exchanges, and come here simply to pass the time & laugh at you  |
|
|
|
... Them too. I bet LambChop is butt-hearted because he spent his coinZ. I surely won't sell him mine. Not before $20,000 pages.  Grampa #2, I respect the fact that old age and hoarding tend to go hand-in-hand, but what is it that makes you believe I'm interested in buying your old newspapers BTCeanie BTCabies Bitcoin? |
|
|
|
...
Sport, we'll make a deal. If you repeat yourself I won't participate. Simple as that. Improvise or GTF out of the game. A proper troll has the dignity to work on his posts. You make me feel sad. Really.
I think I'm gonna cry...
Boo Hoo.
Yes.
Sniff...
Grampa, this is not a variety show put on for your entertainment. The pathetic predicament you've gotten yourself into by investing in BTCeanie BTCabies Bitcoin remains unchanged. No new content for you, so stop wheedling  . |
|
|
|
As I've mentioned before, there was a time when BTCeanie BTCabies were a good investment. That time is but a memory. As is the case with BTCitcoin. |
|
|
|
@grampa #2: Bitcoin
Where dreams come to die |
|
|
|
Yes. Working great. Unlike the Bitcoin fiasco--a "store of value" that loses half of its value in a year  Props for getting me to answer your faggotry.  |
|
|
|
...
So creating a universal ledger is not the way to do money? Maybe you have something better to propose, troll?
Yes, faggot, I do. And the whole world is already using it. It's called money, or "fiat" as you retards have taken to calling it. You may now return to being a spergy little faggot.  |
|
|
|
Ouch, gentlemen. Continue plumbing new lows. My heart would probably break for you if not for the palliative qualities of the lel you provide.  |
|
|
|
...
Actually, I would be interested to know the estimates of energy consumption in gaming versus mining.
I don't have the data, but something tells me that the former is orders of magnitude greater than the latter.
Bitcoiners' community is just a few millions in total and only a small part of it crowd-funded mining operations, including those of Asicminer, Avalon, KnC, BFL and others. Gamers, on the other hand, are in hunderds of millions worldwide if not more.
Anyways, competition is fun, it's worth the energy.
According to satoshi and common sense, the cost of mining should approach the price of the coins mined. This year, approximately 10% of the total Bitcoin in existence has been mined. In other words, if satoshi is correct, the total cost of maintaining Bitcoin network at the present level of security is 10% of the total market cap. Few will argue that the lion's share of that cost is electricity. There are online mining calculators which will give you a relatively accurate number, the only guesswork on your part would need to be the the breakdown (by brand and model, and, thus, efficiency) of the gear being used. Right now, Bitcoin's market cap is small enough for this to be almost inconsequential. But if Bitcoin does succeed as the new world currency, this implies that 10% of the world's wealth will be consumed each year. Most of it in electrical costs. That's staggering, and supplying that much energy is likely unfeasible. Certainly not too eco friendly
But that's all irrelevant. We're starting off with the assumption that running a Bitcoin network is the right way to do money. It's not. Presupposing that blockchain must be maintained is as justified as specifying mice as the prime mover in the next space shuttle design. Sure, it could be done by introducing some truly Goldbergian complications, but ... see where I'm going with this? |
|
|
|
Not until you lrn some tact  |
|
|
|
The uselessness of PoW outside of the context of the blockchain is actually not accidental: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=855520This is what makes money system neutral towards any type of useful work. I don't think comparison of money system to a stock market is appropriate. Money system is a playing field, which needs to be simple, neutral and robust. Stock market is a competition of various players within the money system. Mining allows competition of control to stay an open game for as long as innovation can occur (indefinitely). Other schemes would tend towards concentration of control with long lasting network effects. This is in fact a very intelligent point. I have to say that I was first attracted in principle to such things as primecoin, because they solve at least some obscure mathematical problems during mining. But you are right that what constitutes "useful work" is part of what the market has to decide, and will change over time, so it would be silly to cast it in stone in any successful cryptocurrency. That said, there is indeed a fundamental difficulty with PoW. In order for it to make the blockchain safe, a lot of work has to be done. On the other hand, that is a cost for the use of the currency (a kind of tax on its usage if you want to). During the early mining phase, that tax is essentially paid for by inflation (the phase we are in). Later, the tax will be the fees that have to be paid. If it is true that the cost of PoW is comparable to the inflation right now, that is, 10%, now that would be terribly huge. As long as bitcoin adoption is growing, that's not so much of an issue, but imagine that the whole world economy is taken over by bitcoin. It would mean that 10% of the world economic resources would go into PoW ? It is what I touched upon in that other thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=865870.0 I have no idea how much world resources are spent today to the fiat banking sector (I don't mean, how much money the banking sector is handling, but how much the banking sector's functioning is costing: salaries, real estate .... of banking and financial institutions). The cost of the fiat banking sector is the fiat equivalent of the economic cost of PoW for cryptos. Thanks for understanding! I would like to compare mining to gaming. Imagine the number of graphics cards sold annualy (tens of millions) and the amount of energy humanity "wastes" on shooting aliens in video games. Nobody seems to complain about that, as there is a lot of fun there. Plus there is an added benefit - gaming led to the development of highly efficient parallel processors that now contribute to research in other areas of human life. The same way, mining has a lot of fun for nerds building custom rigs and playing with various settings, while manufacturers and vendors push state of the art silicon technology to produce the most efficient machines. Mining might become an incentive for humanity to push research in energy-efficient compuattion, development of new types of energy sources as well as deeper understanding of cryptographic hash functions. So it's not all that useless as it seems on the surface. Competition requires energy, you can't change that. The good thing, is that energy is not actually "wasted", just transformed. Interesting point re. all the graphic cards sold. It would be a great point if those graphic cards were running at maximum energy consumption 24/7 during their lifetime, and if that energy consumption was anywhere close to today's ASICSs. And if those graphic cards were used to fill giant aircraft hangers, like so:   And yes, energy is never wasted, only transformed. Because first law of thermodynamics. Good one |
|
|
|
Anybody else having dejavu?
The plummeting price is actually really bullish, and here's why: ... Oh, who'm I kiddin'? Yes, it is the same thing, being rinsed & repeated ad infinitum. BUT YOU DO NOT HAVE TO DIE FOR YOUR TASKMASTERS!  |
|
|
|
Hmm... What if...?  But in the mean time:   @grampa #2: Bigger, redder fonts pl0x! |
|
|
|
...  ... I see you've already made plans for next weekend |
|
|
|
No FUD here, filthy Bitcoiner. Your problems have just begun.  In America, free dental care is provided to those who can not afford it  |
|
|
|
Grampa #1: Congrats on ur mad warez skillz! Extra Tadalafil rations to be issued. Grampa #2: More text effects pl0x. The rest of you Bitcoiners:  |
|
|
|
As predictable as Bitcoin's tanking price. As past tense as an you, gramps |
|
|
|
One oversized, apropos of nothing pic deserves another   @grampa #2: Who shat in your diaper? |
|
|
|
...
I'm glad I missed yesterday. It must have been a bear trollfest, yet we still ended up green.
You were here, grampa. You just forgot. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
