Bitcoin simply are not worth ($10 or $9 or $8)

[Amph]

I keep seeing trolls drag out the same dead argument, that the network and miners cannot support a price of $200 per coin, and once we bust that...  It's game over.  
  
Look at how stupid the person sounds who claims that the miners won't support prices of $10, $9, or $8.  That's how stupid the same arguments will sound in a few years about $200, $150, etc.  
  
As Mr Freeze above me said, it's the buyers who determine price, not the miners.

how, big farms can support single digit tells me? there is no way, they must shut down or reduce a large number of their power hashing, and at that point everyone will performs a 51%, the network will be too vulnerable and bitcoin will die

 
  
Dude, what the fuck are you talking about?  
  
If everyone performs a 51% attack, IT'S NO LONGER A 51 % ATTACK!

not in that sense come on.... but in the sense that everyone has the possibility to do it, and they are not all good people like "gigahas.io", that reached 43+ if i'm not mistaken

what i mean is that with a lower price the hashrate will be lower too along with the diff, diff too low means that, even one random guy with 10 tera can perform a 51%

[1715510472]

1715510472

[1715510472]

1715510472

[1715510472]

1715510472

[Lauda]

how, big farms can support single digit tells me? there is no way, they must shut down or reduce a large number of their power hashing, and at that point everyone will performs a 51%, the network will be too vulnerable and bitcoin will die

 
Dude, what the fuck are you talking about?  
  
If everyone performs a 51% attack, IT'S NO LONGER A 51 % ATTACK!

not in that sense come on.... but in the sense that everyone has the possibility to do it, and they are not all good people like "gigahas.io", that reached 43+ if i'm not mistaken

what i mean is that with a lower price the hashrate will be lower too along with the diff, diff too low means that, even one random guy with 10 tera can perform aa 51%

Not exactly. They've hit the 51% mark as far as I know (if not multiple times). You're right though. This is only a problem when we have bad guys in play. This is why people should be using p2pools, but it looks like they don't care enough.
If the difficulty indeed does lower, someone could turn on a massive farm and try to do such an attack. Although I'm pretty sure that someone will turn his on too to protect the investment, so I don't see this scenario really as realistic.
As far as the price goes, OP is spreading FUD. If you don't value your coins, how about you sell me yours for $11 a piece? I'm even being generous.

Update: Yes the thread is very old. It is not against the rules to revive it as long as the posts are relevant I think.

[FakeAccount]

this was a 4 yr old thread until today; there are some serious necrophiliacs here

[cellard]

I keep seeing trolls drag out the same dead argument, that the network and miners cannot support a price of $200 per coin, and once we bust that...  It's game over.  
  
Look at how stupid the person sounds who claims that the miners won't support prices of $10, $9, or $8.  That's how stupid the same arguments will sound in a few years about $200, $150, etc.  
  
As Mr Freeze above me said, it's the buyers who determine price, not the miners.

how, big farms can support single digit tells me? there is no way, they must shut down or reduce a large number of their power hashing, and at that point everyone will performs a 51%, the network will be too vulnerable and bitcoin will die

I'm really not afraid of all those 51% scenarios... Thing is: Bitcoin has always been a technology that's highly self-regulating. If the network hash rate goes down, it becomes profitable again for smaller miners, thus the networks remains secure, and vice-versa. It's kinda beautiful, actually!

That is exactly what is is, a self regulating system. Big ass time miners going out the business because they cry about low price? thats OK, it only means we the individual users can start making profit again by mining individually, until the price goes back up and then they will come back with their mining operations. It's a never ending cycle. We'll be dead before Bitcoin dies, time to assume this fact.

[BillyBobZorton]

If a company like UBER has a bigger marketcap than Bitcoin, that alone should tell you how early on in the game you are. Of course, most people think the opposite and realize after missing the boat.

[Amph]

I keep seeing trolls drag out the same dead argument, that the network and miners cannot support a price of $200 per coin, and once we bust that...  It's game over.  
  
Look at how stupid the person sounds who claims that the miners won't support prices of $10, $9, or $8.  That's how stupid the same arguments will sound in a few years about $200, $150, etc.  
  
As Mr Freeze above me said, it's the buyers who determine price, not the miners.

how, big farms can support single digit tells me? there is no way, they must shut down or reduce a large number of their power hashing, and at that point everyone will performs a 51%, the network will be too vulnerable and bitcoin will die

I'm really not afraid of all those 51% scenarios... Thing is: Bitcoin has always been a technology that's highly self-regulating. If the network hash rate goes down, it becomes profitable again for smaller miners, thus the networks remains secure, and vice-versa. It's kinda beautiful, actually!

That is exactly what is is, a self regulating system. Big ass time miners going out the business because they cry about low price? thats OK, it only means we the individual users can start making profit again by mining individually, until the price goes back up and then they will come back with their mining operations. It's a never ending cycle. We'll be dead before Bitcoin dies, time to assume this fact.

but there is one huge difference, we aren't stuck with machines like those that come from bfl in 2011, now we have asic that mine at one tera... see the difference? you can't say it would be the same as before

if for example the diff will fall to 7M the network would be around 25k giga, so one antminer s5 could control 1/25 of the network, which is 4%, and that with only one antminer...now imagines a small farm....

[Natalia_AnatolioPAMM]

You guys forgot to mention network security (look up the 51% attack) What is the cost of security and how do you even go about measuring it?

good question

[galbros]

this was a 4 yr old thread until today; there are some serious necrophiliacs here

I generally don't like necro threads either, but sometimes it is fun to see that the same things we argue about today have been argued about since the start.

Bitcoin has grown a lot since the OP and hopefully will continue to grow and help people transmit money in a safe and low cost way.

[RodeoX]

You guys forgot to mention network security (look up the 51% attack) What is the cost of security and how do you even go about measuring it?

good question

Ah. It is a good question. The network does have disincentives that make a 51% attack illogical. If you have that much hash power you could attack and crash the market. It will destroy the price temporarily and your fake coins will be not be valuable enough to pay for the operation. In other words you could do it at a huge loss. Or you could use your hash power to create real coins with value and make a profit. Only an evil miner with money to lose launches a %51% attack. It would not end BTC either, it would be disruptive and hurt, but not kill. So why do it?  

[minerpumpkin]

You guys forgot to mention network security (look up the 51% attack) What is the cost of security and how do you even go about measuring it?

good question

Ah. It is a good question. The network does have disincentives that make a 51% attack illogical. If you have that much hash power you could attack and crash the market. It will destroy the price temporarily and your fake coins will be not be valuable enough to pay for the operation. In other words you could do it at a huge loss. Or you could use your hash power to create real coins with value and make a profit. Only an evil miner with money to lose launches a %51% attack. It would not end BTC either, it would be disruptive and hurt, but not kill. So why do it?  

The only one having a true incentive to disturb the network in such a way would be a government or some entity who was trying to destroy BTC for good. In that case money wouldn't matter because they would be doing it out of some other reason.

[AtheistAKASaneBrain]

You guys forgot to mention network security (look up the 51% attack) What is the cost of security and how do you even go about measuring it?

good question

Ah. It is a good question. The network does have disincentives that make a 51% attack illogical. If you have that much hash power you could attack and crash the market. It will destroy the price temporarily and your fake coins will be not be valuable enough to pay for the operation. In other words you could do it at a huge loss. Or you could use your hash power to create real coins with value and make a profit. Only an evil miner with money to lose launches a %51% attack. It would not end BTC either, it would be disruptive and hurt, but not kill. So why do it?  

The only one having a true incentive to disturb the network in such a way would be a government or some entity who was trying to destroy BTC for good. In that case money wouldn't matter because they would be doing it out of some other reason.

The beauty of bitcoin as a self regulating system is that there is no incentive to destroy, since after putting all that time, effort and energy into it, you would benefit more from keeping it alive and being part of the network. Andreas Antonopulous explains it nicely in one of his speeches.

[minerpumpkin]

You guys forgot to mention network security (look up the 51% attack) What is the cost of security and how do you even go about measuring it?

good question

Ah. It is a good question. The network does have disincentives that make a 51% attack illogical. If you have that much hash power you could attack and crash the market. It will destroy the price temporarily and your fake coins will be not be valuable enough to pay for the operation. In other words you could do it at a huge loss. Or you could use your hash power to create real coins with value and make a profit. Only an evil miner with money to lose launches a %51% attack. It would not end BTC either, it would be disruptive and hurt, but not kill. So why do it?  

The only one having a true incentive to disturb the network in such a way would be a government or some entity who was trying to destroy BTC for good. In that case money wouldn't matter because they would be doing it out of some other reason.

The beauty of bitcoin as a self regulating system is that there is no incentive to destroy, since after putting all that time, effort and energy into it, you would benefit more from keeping it alive and being part of the network. Andreas Antonopulous explains it nicely in one of his speeches.

But what if it threatens you somehow? What if you are a bank and believe your business model is seriously threatened by Bitcoin? Or you are a country that feels the need to being able to control the monetary supply? You could then decide to attack Bitcoin in any way you can think of.

[Omikifuse]

I keep seeing trolls drag out the same dead argument, that the network and miners cannot support a price of $200 per coin, and once we bust that...  It's game over.  
  
Look at how stupid the person sounds who claims that the miners won't support prices of $10, $9, or $8.  That's how stupid the same arguments will sound in a few years about $200, $150, etc.  
  
As Mr Freeze above me said, it's the buyers who determine price, not the miners.

how, big farms can support single digit tells me? there is no way, they must shut down or reduce a large number of their power hashing, and at that point everyone will performs a 51%, the network will be too vulnerable and bitcoin will die

 
 
Dude, what the fuck are you talking about?   
 
If everyone performs a 51% attack, IT'S NO LONGER A 51 % ATTACK!

I guess he meant anyone will be able to do 51% attack, not that everyone will 51% attack, what would make no sense

[chaoman]

hahahahaha GREAT BUMP. show these bears some perspective.