I think that we no longer need to be skeptical of the truth of Elon having had participated in some kind of discussions with some miners in very recent times, yet for me it is very interesting that Elon pretty much was able to get his ass saved by Saylor.
I'm genuinely amazed that some
"leading" miners no one's heard of before are going along with this wall street bro charade.
I surely do not claim to be very knowledgeable about any of the details - especially regarding who is who in the mining industry, whether we are talking about North American miners or outside of North American - even though at least the names of miners, mining pools have come up through thte years, and also in recent times, we have some interest in which mining pools are signaling taproot.
I think that part of my main point of my earlier post in sending an attachment to the Saylor tweet is because initially I had seen various posts about Musk being a liar and surely there is already a decent amount of wiffle waffling tweets to catch Musk in a multitude of lies, so it is difficult to be sympathetic for anything that Musk says.. but I had not seen any information to back up what Musk had said about the supposed meeting until I saw the Saylor tweet.
I do get some sense that Saylor tends to be much more grown up than Elon and also has built quite a bit of credibility in the bitcoin space in the past 10 months or so.. as compared to Elon dicking around in a variety of ways.. whether self-serving, distractions or attacks upon bitcoin.
I've been mining with hydro power since like 2015, where's my fucking medal LOL.
I doubt that you were mining for a medal.. but I suppose that there are all kinds of reasons that miners might mine or engage in certain kinds of behaviors besides merely the profit motivations.. Surely some miners are more geographically flexible than others, and surely some miners who are NOT geographically flexible will be limited in considering what kinds of energy sources might be in their area and then decide if that might be profitable for them to mine within the parameters of their energy source options.
But the reality always was that mining is going to happen where power is cheap. Which means renewables where renewables are cheap and I don't think any tweets about meetings will change that.
Well, sure there are both free market motivations and also motivations that exist within bitcoin too.. so I suppose that if the BTC price stays low for a long time, there will be more motivations to cut energy costs - yet at the same time, if there is a large bitcoin mining surplus, the cutting of energy costs might not be as central of a short term motivator - even though more profits could be made from cutting energy costs, there are also likely circumstances in which the focus might not be as much upon cutting energy costs but instead producing a lot of hash power in order to increase the likelihood of mining blocks... so the balance is likely NOT always merely about either cutting energy costs or even concerns about from where the energy might come.
Personally, I would not go so far as to suggest that meetings have no effect or that a lot of public attention could have affects too.. whether meetings or public attention causes actual substantive focusing on getting more green, or going through the motions or attempts to seek government subsidies can be variations regarding how meetings could change focuses of individual miners or pools.
That's the way of the world and spin, no?
Spin and nonsense can both move markets and it can also change investment decisions, so there could be short term impacts, yet not really sure if king daddy gives too many shits in the long run - and even theories will differ about whether sometimes seemingly BIG events like the MTGOX crash or the Bitfinex hack or the China bans bitcoin or even the Musk energy scandal or even a combination of these has any effects on longer term BTC price movements in terms of changing the trajectory or delaying the bull run or if the trajectory is largely unchanged because if there were not one reason for a dump another reason would have come. .and sure on the margins there could be some changes, but in the long term trajectory it is sometimes difficult to measure - some people get scared into or out of positions based on such short-term dynamics too.
Personally, I believe that so many of these things do matter in various small kinds of ways, and I believe that my already existing systems of buying on the way down and selling on the way up attempt to take advantage of seemingly inevitable increased volatility created by such various events and information-spreading talking points of the day (call them FUD, call them FOMO or call them something else), and maybe every once in a while I might tweak what I was going to do on the margins here and there, but most of the time, I do not want to tweak very much, because many times these kinds of happenings end up appearing like blips on the radar when we look back at them.
I would think that miners engage in similar thoughts in terms of whether to change their operations or to consider changing operations (buying or selling equipment), and of course, a miner is way more tied down and has more considerations than a mere simple joe blow like my lil selfie who merely considers buying and selling and which exchanges or direct trades to patronize, and maybe if I will run a node or maybe if I will change wallets to include lightning features, maybe I will talk to other peeps about bitcoin and what should I say, and silly lil things like that in which I even sometimes have technical difficulties in trying to figure out if I want to incorporate more technical changes in my life or how I might talk to other peeps who I come across in my life (if at all) about bitcoin or various happenings in the space including hearing their spin (usually wrong) about what is going on in bitcoinlandia (versus some shitcoin they have heard about as potentially important in the current events arena).
Poll
