The Halving - Good or Bad for Bitcoin?

[astrocity1981]

The miners will just use what they have and stop investing in more expensive machines. I know the price will go up even more if that happens.

[1714991420]

1714991420

[1714991420]

1714991420

[bit1]

The Halving will increase prices to new levels. Say Good or Bad on this case It is according to the situation of each person.

[Amph]

well it depend because at some point if the price will not increase there will be zero incentive for them to mine, unless they have free electrcity, but even then if the price is very low, they can not add other equipments and the network will not grow and can be vulnerable
and i doubt every single miners out there will have free electricity in the best scenario, so many will simply leave the game

When you write things like "zero incentive", "free electricity", and "every single miner", you are being absurd. None of those apply. It isn't worth discussing.

i'm just stating the truth, and what will never happen, there is no way the miners can continue to mine when the reward is almost zero if the price do not increase with the halving

In 2010, miners were mining when the block reward was only $10, so your "there is no way miners can continue to mine..." is just plain wrong.

yeah with a lot less power in play, which mean with a lot much a lot less hash which translate with almost zero in electricity

running one cpu that consume 60w-90w at best all day, with 0.05 electrcicity back then(it was the same) it's like not consuming anything

I am disappointed by your answer, i thought you knew that back then it was very easy to mine bitcoin, because the  total hash was not-existing

1 guy could miner 1k btc in 3 days(i know this for fact because there was one guy that i knew that was mining that amount in the summer 2010), this mean a lot of money more than today, and all this with a mere cpu....no comparison at all

[n691309]

yeah with a lot less power in play, which mean with a lot much a lot less hash which translate with almost zero in electricity

running one cpu that consume 60w-90w at best all day, with 0.05 electrcicity back then(it was the same) it's like not consuming anything

Even 0.05 can affect the profit from mining, so the ideal situation is free electricity, and the halving is good for bitcoin.

[Tstar]

Of course mining will continue: the actual big players could leave and make space for new players which are interested in it. There' no law that says that miners which are mining now are forced to continue later. I would love to see the distributed mining we had before even though I know that's not possible.

[Mickeyb]

well it depend because at some point if the price will not increase there will be zero incentive for them to mine, unless they have free electrcity, but even then if the price is very low, they can not add other equipments and the network will not grow and can be vulnerable
and i doubt every single miners out there will have free electricity in the best scenario, so many will simply leave the game

When you write things like "zero incentive", "free electricity", and "every single miner", you are being absurd. None of those apply. It isn't worth discussing.

i'm just stating the truth, and what will never happen, there is no way the miners can continue to mine when the reward is almost zero if the price do not increase with the halving

In 2010, miners were mining when the block reward was only $10, so your "there is no way miners can continue to mine..." is just plain wrong.

I am disappointed by your answer, i thought you knew that back then it was very easy to mine bitcoin, because the  total hash was not-existing

I guess I wasn't clear. You wrote that there is no way that miners could continue to mine if the reward was near zero and the price did not increase. My point is that mining will continue. If the price doesn't change over the next 9 halvings then the block reward will be around $15. People were mining when the block reward was $10. They will mine when it is $15.

I agree with this! Also chances that this will happen are near to zero so I guess that it makes no sense worrying about this or even discussing it!

[Undermood]

well it depend because at some point if the price will not increase there will be zero incentive for them to mine, unless they have free electrcity, but even then if the price is very low, they can not add other equipments and the network will not grow and can be vulnerable
and i doubt every single miners out there will have free electricity in the best scenario, so many will simply leave the game

When you write things like "zero incentive", "free electricity", and "every single miner", you are being absurd. None of those apply. It isn't worth discussing.

i'm just stating the truth, and what will never happen, there is no way the miners can continue to mine when the reward is almost zero if the price do not increase with the halving

In 2010, miners were mining when the block reward was only $10, so your "there is no way miners can continue to mine..." is just plain wrong.

I am disappointed by your answer, i thought you knew that back then it was very easy to mine bitcoin, because the  total hash was not-existing

I guess I wasn't clear. You wrote that there is no way that miners could continue to mine if the reward was near zero and the price did not increase. My point is that mining will continue. If the price doesn't change over the next 9 halvings then the block reward will be around $15. People were mining when the block reward was $10. They will mine when it is $15.

I agree with this! Also chances that this will happen are near to zero so I guess that it makes no sense worrying about this or even discussing it!

IMO it should be a concern. Nowadays mining farms become centralized. They invested a lot of capital for the facility and paying a lot for electricity or maintaining fees.  If there is no profits made, what is the points of continuing to involving in mining and upgrading their old miners.

[Amph]

well it depend because at some point if the price will not increase there will be zero incentive for them to mine, unless they have free electrcity, but even then if the price is very low, they can not add other equipments and the network will not grow and can be vulnerable
and i doubt every single miners out there will have free electricity in the best scenario, so many will simply leave the game

When you write things like "zero incentive", "free electricity", and "every single miner", you are being absurd. None of those apply. It isn't worth discussing.

i'm just stating the truth, and what will never happen, there is no way the miners can continue to mine when the reward is almost zero if the price do not increase with the halving

In 2010, miners were mining when the block reward was only $10, so your "there is no way miners can continue to mine..." is just plain wrong.

I am disappointed by your answer, i thought you knew that back then it was very easy to mine bitcoin, because the  total hash was not-existing

I guess I wasn't clear. You wrote that there is no way that miners could continue to mine if the reward was near zero and the price did not increase. My point is that mining will continue. If the price doesn't change over the next 9 halvings then the block reward will be around $15. People were mining when the block reward was $10. They will mine when it is $15.

those are only for people that already reached roi and there will be no more added equipments because there will be not enough profit for everyone, this mean that the network can not grow anymore with that tiny reward

anyway the point stand, before it was possible to mine with $10 in block reward because as i said, the hash was very poor, so there where no expensive bill cost in play, now it's different, they cannot mine with $15 when a bif farm is consuming 100k in electrcicity cost alone...

yeah they wil keep mining, but the total hash will be greatly reduced, which lead to an insecure network, you can't compare with the past

[bazar165g]

well it depend because at some point if the price will not increase there will be zero incentive for them to mine, unless they have free electrcity, but even then if the price is very low, they can not add other equipments and the network will not grow and can be vulnerable
and i doubt every single miners out there will have free electricity in the best scenario, so many will simply leave the game

When you write things like "zero incentive", "free electricity", and "every single miner", you are being absurd. None of those apply. It isn't worth discussing.

i'm just stating the truth, and what will never happen, there is no way the miners can continue to mine when the reward is almost zero if the price do not increase with the halving

In 2010, miners were mining when the block reward was only $10, so your "there is no way miners can continue to mine..." is just plain wrong.

I am disappointed by your answer, i thought you knew that back then it was very easy to mine bitcoin, because the  total hash was not-existing

I guess I wasn't clear. You wrote that there is no way that miners could continue to mine if the reward was near zero and the price did not increase. My point is that mining will continue. If the price doesn't change over the next 9 halvings then the block reward will be around $15. People were mining when the block reward was $10. They will mine when it is $15.

those are only for people that already reached roi and there will be no more added equipments because there will be not enough profit for everyone, this mean that the network can not grow anymore with that tiny reward

anyway the point stand, before it was possible to mine with $10 in block reward because as i said, the hash was very poor, so there where no expensive bill cost in play, now it's different, they cannot mine with $15 when a bif farm is consuming 100k in electrcicity cost alone...

yeah they wil keep mining, but the total hash will be greatly reduced, which lead to an insecure network, you can't compare with the past

At that time there are still some ppl who are mining it for hoby or using free electricity without the need of spending a lot for upgrading their miners. If it turns to profits, many ppl will join the game again. Mining difficulty and block reward will come to a balance. The mining will never die unless bitcoin encounters some fatal issues.

[Amph]

well it depend because at some point if the price will not increase there will be zero incentive for them to mine, unless they have free electrcity, but even then if the price is very low, they can not add other equipments and the network will not grow and can be vulnerable
and i doubt every single miners out there will have free electricity in the best scenario, so many will simply leave the game

When you write things like "zero incentive", "free electricity", and "every single miner", you are being absurd. None of those apply. It isn't worth discussing.

i'm just stating the truth, and what will never happen, there is no way the miners can continue to mine when the reward is almost zero if the price do not increase with the halving

In 2010, miners were mining when the block reward was only $10, so your "there is no way miners can continue to mine..." is just plain wrong.

I am disappointed by your answer, i thought you knew that back then it was very easy to mine bitcoin, because the  total hash was not-existing

I guess I wasn't clear. You wrote that there is no way that miners could continue to mine if the reward was near zero and the price did not increase. My point is that mining will continue. If the price doesn't change over the next 9 halvings then the block reward will be around $15. People were mining when the block reward was $10. They will mine when it is $15.

those are only for people that already reached roi and there will be no more added equipments because there will be not enough profit for everyone, this mean that the network can not grow anymore with that tiny reward

anyway the point stand, before it was possible to mine with $10 in block reward because as i said, the hash was very poor, so there where no expensive bill cost in play, now it's different, they cannot mine with $15 when a bif farm is consuming 100k in electrcicity cost alone...

yeah they wil keep mining, but the total hash will be greatly reduced, which lead to an insecure network, you can't compare with the past

At that time there are still some ppl who are mining it for hoby or using free electricity without the need of spending a lot for upgrading their miners. If it turns to profits, many ppl will join the game again. Mining difficulty and block reward will come to a balance. The mining will never die unless bitcoin encounters some fatal issues.

those people were the minority there is no way you can have 400 peta of hash as it is right now with free electrcicty, you must be dreaming

the network will fall apart this is certain, it does not matter if some random miners with free electricity will join again, not even 100 peta will be achieved with a $10 reward in block

tell me how can a farm of 50 peta for example, sustain a $15 block reward, with their maintenance and their bills cost....even with free electricty it's not sustainable, because of maintanance

[n2004al]

The halving is a necessary part of bitcoin, and without it, bitcoin wouldn't be where it was now in the first place.
so obviously good.

Why is necessary? I'm not an expert in this field (in mining or programming) but I think that halving it is only an option that could be not so if the program could have been written otherwise. Nothing will change in bitcoin if the mining of all the amount of bitcoins would have been in much less time than in other about 120 years. No one quality of bitcoin would be different (compared to the actual one) if, for example all the bitcoins would be in the market within the next 20 years (without any halving in years). Maybe this would have affected the price of it but not any other its quality as currency.

if there was not halving the supply would have already exhausted, and satoshi didn't want this, he was thinking that prolonging the mining activity in a long time frame, would be more beneficial for the adoption

because it will leave the necessary time, to spread the awareness for bitcoin

Maybe correct maybe not. No one can predict the behavior and the reaction of the market in such situations. But i am giving another possible scenario which can be probable to happen according to me. If the market will be exhausted maybe (even, with very high probability) the price will be much more low than it is actually and maybe it must need to much time to be higher but for the spread I think that more are in market more the possibility to be known. When are few have few to spread and the few finish fast in spread. When are to much and have in abundance have to much to spread and these don't finish so easy. It is the same with an normal new product. If you have to many of it can send him in much more markets than if were few. the same with bitcoin.

Anyhow, these are only theoretical scenarios. They help in understand, explain things or build hypothesis but the practice is another thing. Must be reality every situations which we are discussing to see how it will be the reaction of the market and the people toward them.

[gkv9]

Maybe correct maybe not. No one can predict the behavior and the reaction of the market in such situations. But i am giving another possible scenario which can be probable to happen according to me. If the market will be exhausted maybe (even, with very high probability) the price will be much more low than it is actually and maybe it must need to much time to be higher but for the spread I think that more are in market more the possibility to be known. When are few have few to spread and the few finish fast in spread. When are to much and have in abundance have to much to spread and these don't finish so easy. It is the same with an normal new product. If you have to many of it can send him in much more markets than if were few. the same with bitcoin.

Anyhow, these are only theoretical scenarios. They help in understand, explain things or build hypothesis but the practice is another thing. Must be reality every situations which we are discussing to see how it will be the reaction of the market and the people toward them.

I liked your way of explanation, but there are few things which I didn't get...
Can you please clarify the whole statement by making a precis of it and say the mean thing???
And yes, halving has never ever affected Bitcoins in terms of prices based on my research...
Until what I saw, the price remains steady regardless of what issues we face in future, as mostly we see pumps and dumps only, but you ain't seeing the real picture, the price is increasing very steadily, and you really don't know the real value of Bitcoins, so comparing the price to halving may be foolish...

[yenxz]

I'm not sure,but i think it good for bitcoin..

[lumeire]

In theory, it should be good for bitcoin, but what will happen in reality is yet to be known.

Too much people saying the price will increase after the halving actually gets me worried, if everyone cashes out the moment the price has increased or has been profitable, it'll just send btc spiraling downwards, maybe this time, for good.

[Pk880058]

Halving will be definitely good for future of bitcoins as it is a milestone in the journey of bitcoins towards mass adaption.
Though due to the involvement of bitcoins in the terrorist attacks on paris have dissolved some hatred towards bitcoins in peoples heart.

[bitart]

Halving will be definitely good for future of bitcoins as it is a milestone in the journey of bitcoins towards mass adaption.
Though due to the involvement of bitcoins in the terrorist attacks on paris have dissolved some hatred towards bitcoins in peoples heart.

Is it proven that it had been involved? If it will spread among people who haven't met with BTC already, it can cause very bad reputation for BTC. It's enough already that most of the people I've met and had a clue about bitcoin was thinking that BTC is for those who want to gamble...

[btckold24]

the less something gets made the more rare it becomes... Also think of all the wallets and people who lose their btc daily.  I  am sure a million + btc if not more is just cyber dust somewhere and the longer that goes on people make less and lose more making it more rare which will increase value

[bitart]

the less something gets made the more rare it becomes... Also think of all the wallets and people who lose their btc daily.  I  am sure a million + btc if not more is just cyber dust somewhere and the longer that goes on people make less and lose more making it more rare which will increase value

Is it really so huge amount already? There are really so much BTC's left behind? If someone loses his private key than it's game over for that wallet? Is there any method to just simply scrap those BTC's (because they are not belonging to anyone) and mine new ones instead?

[AndySt]

I think in general that halving at a given time is useful because it reduces inflation and adds value. It used to at least and I hope that will be.

[mouneshwar123]

Good from my point of view. It is part of the bitcoin protocol, If Halving is bad then Bitcoin is!
check the Controlled supply article on bitcoin wiki: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Controlled_supply
There's no governing body to decide printing of currency notes to control over the money.