Halvings

[Herbert2020]

i feel like this is something that should be discussed in the future, because there are so many unknown factors that are affecting it so everything that is said at this point is just blind speculation.

[kik1977]

how does halving work by the the way? how long does it take? a day, a week or a month?

No, a blink of an eye. Or, to be precise, 10 minutes (on average)
Block 419.999: reward=25 bitcoins
Block 420.000: reward=12.5 bitcoins (not exactly sure if this is going to happen on block 420.000 or 420.001, but you got the point I hope)

[Amph]

isn't the point of fee to keep the network alive? we have enough time to build the value, so by the time fee will be crucial for mining, they would have a very high value, and miners would keep mining without problem

Fees would/should keep it alive in the long term. But without starting a flame war, most of the hopes for scaling involve off-chain scaling, which effectively removes those transactions from the population that miners could hope to eventually collect fees on.

that's why i'm against any off-chain shit, like LN and other crap like sidechain, capacity can be resolved in another way, via heavy optimization for example

[zimmah]

No

Mining will run on mining fees

If you want to spend, just pay a small fee,

Since we already have over 2 transactions per second (and reached the limit of what the current bkocksize can support) by the time block rewards become really small we will probabkh have 1000s of transactions per second.   Even if the fees are really low, the miners will make lots of money from fees.

The block rewards are supposed to be a subsidy for miners to help them in the early days where the transaction fees aren't enough to make mining profitable. The network is expected and supposed to grow to sustain itself.

[Piltover]

isn't the point of fee to keep the network alive? we have enough time to build the value, so by the time fee will be crucial for mining, they would have a very high value, and miners would keep mining without problem

Fees would/should keep it alive in the long term. But without starting a flame war, most of the hopes for scaling involve off-chain scaling, which effectively removes those transactions from the population that miners could hope to eventually collect fees on.

that's why i'm against any off-chain shit, like LN and other crap like sidechain, capacity can be resolved in another way, via heavy optimization for example

The most people with Bitcoin are hoping that the halving will be nice and that is because the value of the Bitcoin was already stable for a long time so that have now to recover and will slowly rise and that is nice.
But of course you cant control it and it will be really hard to know what the value will be some people even said that it wont rise in the halving.

[Cybertron00]

1 BTC per block at 21 mill coins is  .2% inflation a year, basically 0 due to lost coins.

IMO a small inflation is equaled out by lost coins.

i really didn't get what really happens when it halving other said that bitcoin will increase price but i know halve means half so it means the bitcoin price will go down but their telling to me that halving is the time that bitcoin price is going up can anyone explain me what really happens when it bitcoin halving ? thank for those who explain it to me thanks

[BitsandBites]

The halving can come in soon but there has to be a price rise before that is going to happen other wise the price is going to be low. That is not a bad thing because then we can buy much more coins then at the moment.

[blackmachinegun]

i feel like this is something that should be discussed in the future, because there are so many unknown factors that are affecting it so everything that is said at this point is just blind speculation.

I think for the good of bitcoin not for the good of one single group such as a group of miners. bitcoin need halving? perhaps up to a certain number?
for now there should be no discussion about this. bitcoin still requires halving for the next decade.

[spazzdla]

No

Mining will run on mining fees

If you want to spend, just pay a small fee,

Since we already have over 2 transactions per second (and reached the limit of what the current bkocksize can support) by the time block rewards become really small we will probabkh have 1000s of transactions per second.   Even if the fees are really low, the miners will make lots of money from fees.

The block rewards are supposed to be a subsidy for miners to help them in the early days where the transaction fees aren't enough to make mining profitable. The network is expected and supposed to grow to sustain itself.

I highly doubt the fees will be enough to keep companies mining BTC...

[BurtW]

No

Mining will run on mining fees

If you want to spend, just pay a small fee,

Since we already have over 2 transactions per second (and reached the limit of what the current bkocksize can support) by the time block rewards become really small we will probabkh have 1000s of transactions per second.   Even if the fees are really low, the miners will make lots of money from fees.

The block rewards are supposed to be a subsidy for miners to help them in the early days where the transaction fees aren't enough to make mining profitable. The network is expected and supposed to grow to sustain itself.

I highly doubt the fees will be enough to keep companies mining BTC...

I highly doubt the economics run that direction.  It is true that if fees do not rise then companies will not mine therefore fees will rise in order to keep companies mining BTC.

[odolvlobo]

I highly doubt the fees will be enough to keep companies mining BTC...

You are exaggerating. About 50 btc per day is currently paid in transaction fees.  Somebody is going to mine in order to earn those fees.

I highly doubt the economics run that direction.  It is true that if fees do not rise then companies will not mine therefore fees will rise in order to keep companies mining BTC.

I don't think that is necessarily true either because there is a tragedy-of-the-commons problem, as in "I'll let someone else worry about miners getting paid".

The core issue is that the security against a 51% attack equals the cost of mining, which depends on mining revenue. If mining revenue is low, then the security will be low as well.

The only scenarios that will keep the fees (and thus security) sufficiently high are a limit on the block size that induces bidding on space in the block, a very large number of transactions paying 1 satoshi each (requiring an unlimited block size), or something in between.

[bittrojan]

1 BTC per block at 21 mill coins is  .2% inflation a year, basically 0 due to lost coins.

IMO a small inflation is equaled out by lost coins.


*Edit*
If you don't understand what the halving in this thread is not for you, sorry.  A little more technical of a discussion.

never change,people will support bitcoin halving because they believe it will make bitcoin price better,and its non miner said,but miner said its hard to choose to support bitcoin halving.

[matt4054]

A lot of blocks are already nearing 1 BTC in fees anyway, and it's only to grow further over time.

The only discussion would be about how sensible it would be to compensate for lost coins, if necessary.

[spazzdla]

50 BTC is nothing compared to the power currently used to mine BTC.

[odolvlobo]

50 BTC is nothing compared to the power currently used to mine BTC.

Now that we have established that fees will be enough to keep companies mining BTC, the issue is how much revenue is enough to secure Bitcoin. You seem to be assuming that the current cost of mining BTC is the minimum necessary, but I don't think that is true. I also don't think that 50 BTC per day is enough, so total fees will have to rise as the subsidy falls at some point, whether by increasing the fee per transaction or by increasing the number of transactions, or both.

[spazzdla]

50 BTC is nothing compared to the power currently used to mine BTC.

Now that we have established that fees will be enough to keep companies mining BTC, the issue is how much revenue is enough to secure Bitcoin. You seem to be assuming that the current cost of mining BTC is the minimum necessary, but I don't think that is true. I also don't think that 50 BTC per day is enough, so total fees will have to rise as the subsidy falls at some point, whether by increasing the fee per transaction or by increasing the number of transactions, or both.

If bitcoin hash rate is   X

and the world hash rate is 100 000 * X for mining crypto.. there will be problems as attacking bitcoin is a snooze.. :S..

We have never established the fees are enough to keep companies online.. they will bail 100%.  They have not choice but to follow profits or sink.

[Josef27]

No

Mining will run on mining fees

If you want to spend, just pay a small fee,

Since we already have over 2 transactions per second (and reached the limit of what the current bkocksize can support) by the time block rewards become really small we will probabkh have 1000s of transactions per second.   Even if the fees are really low, the miners will make lots of money from fees.

The block rewards are supposed to be a subsidy for miners to help them in the early days where the transaction fees aren't enough to make mining profitable. The network is expected and supposed to grow to sustain itself.

I think a small amount of every fee should be pooled, and some how miners, address holders vote on upgrades/ paying for fixes.

[spazzdla]

I do see what you are saying about the fees paying for the network though.

One future I imagine is BTC is the king of crypto but it is not cheap to use.  
Making a transaction for something important would want to be done on the most secure chain.
Due to being the most secure chain everyone wants a piece so they can make a transaction they know will last the ages.

[BombayChicken]

The most people with Bitcoin are now waiting for a higher value and that is because they know that there will be more people that is going to have some profit soon.
But of course it will be really hard to know what the value will bring of Bitcoin but that is the risk that you should take.