[2016-10-25] What Happens When Bitcoin Mining Rewards Diminish To Zero?

[Nina Lyon]

Bitcoin  is the most popular cryptocurrency today with millions of transaction taking place every day. It is created by solving complex algorithms with sophisticated computers in an energy-intensive process termed bitcoin mining. However, there are only 21 million bitcoins that can ever mined.

Many medium-scale and small-scale miners either ignore the effects of the event of the mining rewards diminishing or see that by the time it does reach zero they could have reached their  break-even point or the transaction fees will rise up enough to compensate them. 

Read more: https://coinidol.com/what-happens-when-bitcoin-mining-rewards-diminish-to-zero/

[snipie]

It is said over and over and this resume the whole situation :
"Miners will continue to earn fees and because of a reduced supply the price of bitcoin will rise and so to the fees paid to miners thus, most miners will continue to mine bitcoins keeping the network running"

[serjent05]

Aside from the tx fee being mined when bitcoin mining rewards Diminish to Zero (it will never be because of the transaction fees being mined instead)  I don't think  it will be a "slavery"  since mining Bitcoin is always been a freedom of your choice.  No one pushes us to mine bitcoin.  It is our choice to mine it according to our likings and thinking.

[NyeFe]

The question should be, what would be the cost of transaction fees once we reach milestone.

Based on previous calculations, transaction fees (at that time) would be useless for dust/small transactions.

[DooMAD]

The question should be, what would be the cost of transaction fees once we reach milestone.

Based on previous calculations, transaction fees (at that time) would be useless for dust/small transactions.

It largely depends on how scaling is resolved over the long term, along with the price.  If Bitcoin's main chain achieves a greater capacity, the cost can be spread over a greater number of participants and fees shouldn't rise to the point where most users are unable to afford it. 

If scaling is achieved predominantly off-chain, or through payment channels or sidechains, then some amount of whatever fees are being paid on those transactions might end up going somewhere else and not to the miners.  In which case, the fee for securing transactions on the main chain would have to rise.  This could potentially be prohibitive for those who aren't hodling large sums.

[odolvlobo]

In typical journalistic fashion, the article was written by someone that doesn't quite understand the topic.

It is said over and over and this resume the whole situation :
"Miners will continue to earn fees and because of a reduced supply the price of bitcoin will rise and so to the fees paid to miners thus, most miners will continue to mine bitcoins keeping the network running"

Minor correction: the supply isn't reduced. The supply continues to increase until at some point it will be fixed at 21 million.

Increasing adoption with a fixed supply causes the price to rise. On the other hand, falling adoption with a fixed supply causes the price to fall.

[snipie]

In typical journalistic fashion, the article was written by someone that doesn't quite understand the topic.

It is said over and over and this resume the whole situation :
"Miners will continue to earn fees and because of a reduced supply the price of bitcoin will rise and so to the fees paid to miners thus, most miners will continue to mine bitcoins keeping the network running"

Minor correction: the supply isn't reduced. The supply continues to increase until at some point it will be fixed at 21 million.

Increasing adoption with a fixed supply causes the price to rise. On the other hand, falling adoption with a fixed supply causes the price to fall.

Yeah, i think the journalist wants to say "a reduced block's reward"  because of the next halving and so on,...
For the article it is a copy paste from suggestions said over and over many times in our forums and in the press