Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[S3052]

I must say while the discussion above is very interesting, it would also be good to see more discussion on bitcoin price movement. Because this is the original purpose of this thread..

[1714747980]

1714747980

[1714747980]

1714747980

[AlexGR]

...
OMG - you envision a fee market (long before it's neccessary), but you can not see the commoditization of mining equipment hence re-decentralization of mining!?

I don't understand what you mean. Explain?

If I remember right, there is even a paper written on this topic. But for the start, this should work: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2o71hh/physics_and_economics_will_distributed_mining_im/

"As someone who comes from a physics and engineering background, over the long run I'm not concerned with mining centralization. Physics will ensure it is distributed."
"As a result, the mining centralization we see in Greenland and large data centers becomes enormously unprofitable. Any centralization of mining would REQUIRE heat recycling, which severely limits data centers and necessitates distribution unless you introduce heat pumps, which also increase cost."
--submitted 1 year ago
How's that decentralization goin' thus far?

The guy doesn't understand that mining is centralized in China, not Greenland.
He doesn't understand that it's economically idiotic to heat your hot water with miners, because miners need *cold water* going into the waterblocks -- recirculating hot water for cooling ain't cooling, it ain't gonna do much. If hot water was used at a constant rate, 24/7, he might have a better point, but it don't work like that.
Regardless, *mining is concentrated around cheap electricity,* not where it's cold (Greenland).
The fact that silicon might hit quantum dead end "round the year 2024" ain't doing diddly for us now.

TL;DR: don't buy his "physics and engineering background," he doesn't think things through.
P.S. If you wanna talk about particulars of utilizing waste heat, I'll be glad to.

P.P.S. LOL, HE'S the bro behind "That is why we are building a bitcoin miner that fits inside a water heater."
I remember when IceDrill was selling us stories about their farm providing heat for apartment complexes

Well, the heaters are just one thought. But I think there is more to the thought of commoditization (e.g. longer and longer development circles for ASICs). BTW: I don't see mining centralization as a big problem. There is always competition by other crypto-currencies to balancethings in Bitcoin.

Let's get to the heat waste discussion: Maybe it would be possible to gain back some energy by using Stirling engines. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirling_engine

>I don't see mining centralization as a big problem.
In that case, the point's moot. I don't see it as a catastrophic problem, but it's a serious one. One that effectively nulls any pretensions to Bitcoin being "decentralized."

>heaters are just one thought
It's an awful thought. It's fail.

>Stirling engines
Not sure if srs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_engine#Efficiency <==and that's just what's theoretically possible.
Have you also considered this?

Put it this way: Let's say Chinese coal-fired Electricity is 2 pennies per kWh, and yours is 4 pennies. Your Stirling engine manages to convert 3% of wasted heat back into electricity. Yeah.
Bonus: if Stirling heat reclamation made sense, Chinese megaminers would use it too. They'd make the thing, too -- you'll buy it from them

Seriously tho, read the laws of thermodynamics, it's straightforward stuff.

I can see, why it makes no sense for the chinese miners today. However, I expect margins to become zero/negative in the forseeable* future.

What do you think will happen longterm (*10 to 20 years)?

even if some engine can convert heat into electricity maybe by peltier, i dont think its economically feasible to do .

Nitinol springs that operate with heat difference, would probably be veeeery economically feasible.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[bargainbin]

...
What do you think will happen longterm (*10 to 20 years)?

10-20 years is far away. China might get stricter environmental/Bitcoin mining regulations.


... and Bitcoin mining will become centralized somewhere else. Maybe next to some incredibly cheap wildass Libertarian nuclear reactor, spewing neutrons all over Somalia, with only worries being radiation effects on silicon

Just like everything else, Bitcoin mining started out with privateers/wildcatters/nutjobs/visionaries, & ended up as an industry: doing stuff to make money.
The problem, for me, is money != BTC for miners; they can *sell* BTC, which means they're not committed to BTC as much as the hodlers are.
If, for instance, another SHA256 coin came around that was more profitable to mine, or, if some government paid them to mess with Bitcoin (mind you, paid them in !BTC, so reward doesn't become worthless when BTC tanks), they'll *definitely* do that. Or exert leverage on hodlers (extort) to not do it.

[Chef Ramsay]

LTC

[8up]

LTC

BTC

[JayJuanGee]

Blocks are full again. I think this will now probably happen any time the market tries to pump.

I don't see much upside but there's a lot of potential downside.

What's your source for this apparently pure conjecture?

Looks like we are generally down in the last days by nearly 15%, and even at 85% full, transactions were still going completely through with nearly no fees in less than 10 hours, and with fees in about an hour or so.

https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size?timespan=60days&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=

With less room to grow, there will be less growth. I don't see how that is avoidable.

Yes... sure.. your overall statement is true in the abstract... and probably in long term application.


However, in the immediate term, and while you were making your statement, it was not true... and the blocksize average was going down... as is depicted in the link that I provided.  Accordingly, there is still space, and every little market uptick doesn't result in an emergency need to repeat that "the sky is falling".. when there is no actual evidence of a direct relationship, like you had asserted.

Like I described, the fullness of the blockchain size i

[Fatman3001]

...
OMG - you envision a fee market (long before it's neccessary), but you can not see the commoditization of mining equipment hence re-decentralization of mining!?

I don't understand what you mean. Explain?

If I remember right, there is even a paper written on this topic. But for the start, this should work: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2o71hh/physics_and_economics_will_distributed_mining_im/

"As someone who comes from a physics and engineering background, over the long run I'm not concerned with mining centralization. Physics will ensure it is distributed."
"As a result, the mining centralization we see in Greenland and large data centers becomes enormously unprofitable. Any centralization of mining would REQUIRE heat recycling, which severely limits data centers and necessitates distribution unless you introduce heat pumps, which also increase cost."
--submitted 1 year ago
How's that decentralization goin' thus far?

The guy doesn't understand that mining is centralized in China, not Greenland.
He doesn't understand that it's economically idiotic to heat your hot water with miners, because miners need *cold water* going into the waterblocks -- recirculating hot water for cooling ain't cooling, it ain't gonna do much. If hot water was used at a constant rate, 24/7, he might have a better point, but it don't work like that.
Regardless, *mining is concentrated around cheap electricity,* not where it's cold (Greenland).
The fact that silicon might hit quantum dead end "round the year 2024" ain't doing diddly for us now.

TL;DR: don't buy his "physics and engineering background," he doesn't think things through.
P.S. If you wanna talk about particulars of utilizing waste heat, I'll be glad to.

P.P.S. LOL, HE'S the bro behind "That is why we are building a bitcoin miner that fits inside a water heater."
I remember when IceDrill was selling us stories about their farm providing heat for apartment complexes

Well, the heaters are just one thought. But I think there is more to the thought of commoditization (e.g. longer and longer development circles for ASICs). BTW: I don't see mining centralization as a big problem. There is always competition by other crypto-currencies to balancethings in Bitcoin.

Let's get to the heat waste discussion: Maybe it would be possible to gain back some energy by using Stirling engines. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirling_engine

>I don't see mining centralization as a big problem.
In that case, the point's moot. I don't see it as a catastrophic problem, but it's a serious one. One that effectively nulls any pretensions to Bitcoin being "decentralized."

>heaters are just one thought
It's an awful thought. It's fail.

>Stirling engines
Not sure if srs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_engine#Efficiency <==and that's just what's theoretically possible.
Have you also considered this?

Put it this way: Let's say Chinese coal-fired Electricity is 2 pennies per kWh, and yours is 4 pennies. Your Stirling engine manages to convert 3% of wasted heat back into electricity. Yeah.
Bonus: if Stirling heat reclamation made sense, Chinese megaminers would use it too. They'd make the thing, too -- you'll buy it from them

Seriously tho, read the laws of thermodynamics, it's straightforward stuff.

I can see, why it makes no sense for the chinese miners today. However, I expect margins to become zero/negative in the forseeable* future.

What do you think will happen longterm (*10 to 20 years)?

First of all, I think the guy in the article is confusing Greenland with Iceland. Absolutely nothing is concentrated in Greenland.

Second of all, data centers existed before Bitcoin mining, so there's no need to reinvent the wheel. The only viable solution for reusing the heat is to run the mining coolant in several closed loops inside the data center, run them through several heat exchanger where the heat is led to a different closed loop system used for central heating for nearby houses or office buildings. 40-60 degrees celsius through radiators makes sense. Heating the liquid further cancels any gains because it will need to be cooled down again (remember, you can't use the liquid from the closed loop system directly), and water heaters are (as lambie pointed out) used too sporadically.

Third, miners don't do that because sunk cost is a killer in Bitcoin mining. And such a system is very, very....VERY expensive.

[xyzzy099]

Absolutely nothing is concentrated in Greenland.

Except suicide...

[Equus]

. . .

even if some engine can convert heat into electricity maybe by peltier, i dont think its economically feasible to do .

Nitinol springs that operate with heat difference, would probably be veeeery economically feasible.

It doesn't matter what technology you use.  Unless your miner operates at 500 C, the amount of electricity you can generate is very small.   

Even boiling coolant water could at best give you 25% energy recovery, even with a perfect system.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[bargainbin]

... system used for central heating for nearby houses or office buildings. 40-60 degrees celsius through radiators makes sense. ...

Forced hot water heat temp is 82-98C. 40-60 for radiant heat (not really common).
Would have to be fairly special houses -- central heating (for apartments) usually means *steam* heat (convenient, because no return pipes with steam).

Except suicide...

MFW "... According to a report published in the Science Daily" misread "Suicide Daily."
Also the language in the chart:
"Jumping from heights" (So jumping up & down won't do it; check.)
"Cutting with sharp objects" (Put away those marshmallows!! I read the Wikipedia, it simply won't work!)

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

When you really sit down and work through possible options with businesses, as I have done, they typically don't want on-chain scaling.

Think about it: if you are a business, why would you want a solution that involves your competitors being able to figure out how much you are paying your suppliers, or how much your customers are spending on your product? On-chain bitcoin transactions, even when used well, do a piss-poor job of hiding this information. I know it may run counter to the mob wisdom of this subreddit, but this is actually preventing a number of industries from adopting bitcoin.


Business types.
https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/47kme0/bitcoin_classic_2016_roadmap_announcement/d0ewnqb

[blunderer]

^
I guess financial transparency isn't such a hot idea after all

[Fatman3001]

... system used for central heating for nearby houses or office buildings. 40-60 degrees celsius through radiators makes sense. ...

Forced hot water heat temp is 82-98C. 40-60 for radiant heat (not really common).
Would have to be fairly special houses -- central heating (for apartments) usually means *steam* heat (convenient, because no return pipes with steam).

That's part of the problem. It's difficult to retro-install the systems, you basically have to build the neighborhood at the same time as you build the data center. I can't find where I got this from but i think they might have used underfloor heating.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

^
I guess financial transparency isn't such a hot idea after all

It's peculiar. When I purchase important swag I want the whole world to know.

https://store.coinbase.com/

[JayJuanGee]

I must say while the discussion above is very interesting, it would also be good to see more discussion on bitcoin price movement. Because this is the original purpose of this thread..

Yeah... go ahead and insert such discussion, then.   

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[adamstgBit]

When you really sit down and work through possible options with businesses, as I have done, they typically don't want on-chain scaling.

Think about it: if you are a business, why would you want a solution that involves your competitors being able to figure out how much you are paying your suppliers, or how much your customers are spending on your product? On-chain bitcoin transactions, even when used well, do a piss-poor job of hiding this information. I know it may run counter to the mob wisdom of this subreddit, but this is actually preventing a number of industries from adopting bitcoin.


Business types.
https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/47kme0/bitcoin_classic_2016_roadmap_announcement/d0ewnqb

maaku7 is confusing the issue...

and i guess he hasn't heard about confidential TX now made possible using bitcoin.

besides no one is stoping him for dev.ing the LN so that these businesses who dont want to TX on the main chain can use LN...

dumbass, what a dumbass.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

In other news: Our good friend Bruce Fenton is rumoured to be buying friends and influencing people.

Ok so for those who haven't seen anything about the drama until now - /u/junseth and I are here at the roundtable. We happen to be members of this beach club, and received permission from the club to shoot video, and have been interviewing and discussing Bitcoin with attendees.

Most/all of the attendees here are of the belief that Bruce Fenton is buying friends, and that this conference is mostly Bruce at the front of the room acting like a self-help speaker, telling highly competent devs that "We can do it" and that Bruce is highly patronizing.

...

Fenton had security escort us from the lunch room, and in a weirdly confrontational talk with management, we had to relinquish a camera card in order to remain at the facility. Nonetheless, we are dedicated to providing transparency to you, the bitcoin community.

Don't let Bruce keep you out of the debate. Help us get attention to what's going on today, tune in tonight, and let's get the message out about this weekend's discussion (assuming bruce doesn't succeed in getting us kicked out of the property)

Watch it live.
https://plus.google.com/events/cq4vj4n6ogqa7stsufh32rq1vkc?hl=en