NFTs in the Bitcoin blockchain - Ordinal Theory

[sha420hashcollision]

you must be aware that in a free market you may value something one way and someone else will value it differently, would you buy .5 bitcoin for 1 bitcoin? It really just looks like a doubling scam IMO.

[1714263305]

1714263305

[1714263305]

1714263305

[1714263305]

1714263305

[1714263305]

1714263305

[1714263305]

1714263305

[1714263305]

1714263305

[JayJuanGee]

you must be aware that in a free market you may value something one way and someone else will value it differently, would you buy .5 bitcoin for 1 bitcoin? It really just looks like a doubling scam IMO.

If you have attached something (such as an inscription) to your various satoshis that have a nominal value of 0.5 BTC or even you have accumulate a bunch of cardinal satoshis into a 0.5 BTC UTXO, and you have stated that you will sell that 0.5 BTC for 1 BTC or even for 50 BTC, and you are able to find a buyer, then I don't really have a problem with that... I am not necessarily going to buy it, but if I believe that I can buy the 0.5 BTC for 1 BTC, and then I will be able to sell it to someone else for 10 BTC, then why would I not do it?  I need more information that might cause me to be dissuaded.. if it is merely a valuation or a false valuation, then who am I to say, except maybe I might know that granny who is buying it from me is not able to afford it and is not going to be able to sell it for higher as she believes that she is going to be able to, then maybe perhaps I might hesitate if I happen to know the vulnerability of the buyer.. perhaps? 

I have used this example before, but let me just repeat it for the sake of the dilemma that can sometimes present to ourselves.. I recall that some time around 2017, I had a guy who had been referred to me, and he wanted to buy bitcoin in order that he could buy Onecoin with it.  I found out about this because when I asked him for his BTC address so that I could send BTC to him, he showed me some kind of a onecoin account or he gave me some kind of an indication that he was sending it to an account that his friend or cousin had told him about.  I told him that one coin is a scam, and I said that I am not responsible for any of the bullshit that might be involved in terms of whether he receives the coins that I send to the address, but once he gives me that money (the physical dollars), I am ONLY responsible for sending the amount of BTC that we had agreed the dollars to be worth.  He said o.k., and I sent the BTC to the address that he had given me.  He came back to me several times, and most of the transactions were not very large, but they seemed to be increasing each time, and each time he came I told him that One coin is a scam, yet since he was an adult (like in his late 20s or early 30s) and he seemed to be able to make decisions for himself, each time I sent the coins to the address that he gave me and that he told me that it was some kind of a one coin address.

I had some other examples in which I had guys referred to me, and I told them that I would sell them BTC, but I would not go over a certain amount on the first transaction, and I likely would not go over some other certain amounts, even if we get to know each other or even if they pay me really high transaction fees (such as greater than 20%)... I refused to engage in the transaction, but those were mostly red flags for me in terms of my own safety and even my uncertainties about what kinds of connections that those guys had in order to be engaging in such large transactions and willing to pay such high amounts to me in order to get me to go above limits that I had already communicated to them.

We likely have some personal discretion in terms of what we are going to do when we are faced with various kinds of ways in which we might be able to make money, and surely the mere fact that someone places a different (or a higher) subjective value on an item is not any kind of deter (and should not be).  The market works upon incentives and differences in subjective value.  Let's say that if I repair cars and you raise cows and larry_vw_1955 installs and troubleshoots networking services, and surely we might be able to earn more by trading our goods and services rather than just sticking with our own product/service, so if I want some beef and to have my internet installed, I might be better off to trade with either you or larry_vw_1955 rather than trying to do the same myself because you guys are better at what you do, and you can produce those matters cheaper than me, so I value those items higher so I am willing to repair your cars in order to get that beef from you and to have my network installed/fixed by larry_vw_1955... Surely sometimes people will either have wrong assessments of value or they might believe that they can get higher prices from someone else, and surely it could be true that the grandma buying the 0.5 BTC (worth of satoshis) from me for 1 BTC or even for 10 BTC might be able to sell them for higher amounts currently or at a later date, and that is her own speculation or perhaps we have asymmetric information in regards to the subject matter regarding the value of those satoshis... I don't necessarily have any kind of duty to figure out why I am getting paid more or maybe I should be selling them for higher than I am, and many times, any of us are incentivized to sell products services for as much as we can without necessarily engaging in illegal or immoral practices.. which also are not necessarily always clear or agreed upon.

[larry_vw_1955]

Let's say that if I repair cars and you raise cows and larry_vw_1955 installs and troubleshoots networking services, and surely we might be able to earn more by trading our goods and services rather than just sticking with our own product/service, so if I want some beef and to have my internet installed, I might be better off to trade with either you or larry_vw_1955 rather than trying to do the same myself because you guys are better at what you do, and you can produce those matters cheaper than me, so I value those items higher so I am willing to repair your cars in order to get that beef from you and to have my network installed/fixed by larry_vw_1955...

i guess if the us dollar ever devalued too much people could always just do away with fiat altogether and even bitcoin and just go back to bartering. nothing wrong with that. currencies are really just a convenience. i guess... i'll need to brush up on my networking skills though 

[pooya87]

The creation of a system to number each satoshi, then seems to allow for the attachment of inscriptions to each satoshi

The term "inscription to each satoshi" is used to distract the public opinion from the spam that is taking place. Otherwise they are not actually "inscribing" anything least of all satoshis, the junk they inject is in the input and it is in one transaction that has nothing to do with the satoshis being sent to the new address(es).

Besides if they wanted to "inscribe satoshis" they could have used the outputs, like limiting it to 2 output the first being the satoshis being sent to an address and second output being an OP_RETURN containing the "inscription". But since the main goal is to spam the chain they use inputs instead or more specifically they exploit Taproot script's lack of size limitation to inject junk into the chain.

[coreyou]

funny Topic
Bitcoin and NFT 
its like Bullseye with Shotgun

BTC to slow & expensive
--> just in tecnical its possible

just as example it could work like that:   (read the tecnical, not the funny price)
https://opensea.io/assets/matic/0x2953399124f0cbb46d2cbacd8a89cf0599974963/57142501887968388235837267819324166518146487844381338937837070524380981755905

[JayJuanGee]

Let's say that if I repair cars and you raise cows and larry_vw_1955 installs and troubleshoots networking services, and surely we might be able to earn more by trading our goods and services rather than just sticking with our own product/service, so if I want some beef and to have my internet installed, I might be better off to trade with either you or larry_vw_1955 rather than trying to do the same myself because you guys are better at what you do, and you can produce those matters cheaper than me, so I value those items higher so I am willing to repair your cars in order to get that beef from you and to have my network installed/fixed by larry_vw_1955...

i guess if the us dollar ever devalued too much people could always just do away with fiat altogether and even bitcoin and just go back to bartering. nothing wrong with that. currencies are really just a convenience. i guess... i'll need to brush up on my networking skills though 

Yes.. but I was not really attempting to make any point about barter, even though sometimes we can do that, and there can be a lot of advantages with various kinds of circular economy, even local trades of bitcoin... but really I was attempting to make points about how subjective value likely differs between people when they are deciding to do any kind of trade, and that is part of what incentivizes anyone to actually engage in a trade - it's largely because they personally perceive that they are getting more value out of doing the trade than they would get if they had not gotten in the trade, and a lot of times they will feel that they got surplus value out of the trade in a way that they may well have been willing to pay more for whatever thing that they got.  If parties were completely neutral and did not feel that they were getting some surplus value, they may well easily be dissuaded from going through with the trade.. If they feel somewhat neutral about the value that they are getting in their trade, then any kind of obstacle will cause them to say fuck it and abandon going through with the trade.

The creation of a system to number each satoshi, then seems to allow for the attachment of inscriptions to each satoshi

The term "inscription to each satoshi" is used to distract the public opinion from the spam that is taking place. Otherwise they are not actually "inscribing" anything least of all satoshis, the junk they inject is in the input and it is in one transaction that has nothing to do with the satoshis being sent to the new address(es).

Besides if they wanted to "inscribe satoshis" they could have used the outputs, like limiting it to 2 output the first being the satoshis being sent to an address and second output being an OP_RETURN containing the "inscription". But since the main goal is to spam the chain they use inputs instead or more specifically they exploit Taproot script's lack of size limitation to inject junk into the chain.

It is quite likely that I am not technologically sophisticated enough to understand what is going on, and perhaps I will change my mind later, but I am not quite willing to go along with your characterization of the current use of that extra space that is allowed in each transaction as "spam," merely because there might be some other more preferable ways to do it, but I think that I kind of understand what you are saying, and you are not the ONLY one saying similar things - but I am still finding it difficult to consider how what I believe to be going on right now as problematic, even though surely in the past couple of months the BTC on-chain transaction fees have been going up because the mempool has mostly been staying full in these recent times, but the transactions that go through are still being paid for - even if you seem to be of the belief that the usage of the space in those kinds of ways is getting that extra space for too cheap (which then would seem to better fit into the definition of spam)..

...but I am still not quite willing to go there.. especially if we might be saying that they are ONLY having to currently pay between 5-6 sats per vbyte for the lowest of priority transactions... or sure if they want their transactions to go through more quickly, currently they are still paying 20 sats or more per vbyte. .and so far all of the 1-2 sats per vbyte transactions are still not clearing for several weeks now... but we still are not seeing the transaction costs going straight up as many had been speculating to be occurring (or going to occur).. and what is going on currently does not really seem to fit my ideas of what I might consider spam since parties are seeming to pay for stuff that they subjectively perceive to have either current value or potentially future value, even if some others may well disagree about that value or potential value.. which again, does not seem like spam to me.. not the same kind of spam as we had in late 2017 and January 2018 in which there seemed to have had been purposeful attempts to block the BTC transactions from going through, to cause frustration with BTC transactions, to pump shitcoins and essentially seeming to engage in a kind of purposeful sabotage of the BTC blockchain in order to push bitcoin is broken narratives rather than really trying to push through transactions, which does not seem to currently be the objective with the placement of dickbuttfarts and seemingly other materials that many others do not perceive as valuable on the BTC blockchain. 

I will concede that we cannot really get into the heads of the transactors to figure out their purposes and reasons for their transactions, but I don't think that we really see any evidence that this is currently an attack on bitcoin, like you and some others are framing it to be... and perhaps from my perspective, it would be an attack to try to fix it with something that causes overly attempts at stopping what to me seems to be valid transactions within the current rules of bitcoin, even if I personally am not buying any of that crap and/or wanting to buy that crap (not saying that I might not change my mind in the future, but I am not very excited about buying shitcoins or even speculative bullshit, even though others may value it, and perhaps I may decide to change my mind later, even though I currently am more of an observer of the nonsense valuations and even the some of the attempts to rush in and to get in early with the ideas that the earlier inscribed transactions might have more value than later inscribed transactions).

[philipma1957]

Look it boils down to this watts per dollar.  Or as satoshi says energy into value.


since Sept 1 2020 to now scrypt algo has generated more dollars per watt.

Why is that simple doge does not half it slowly lowers its inflation rate every year it mints.

year 1 = 1x coins
year 2 = 2x coins or 100 percent inflation

but year 100 = 100 x coins grand total minted
and year 101 = 101 x coins or an inflation rate of 1%

and of course ltc will be ½ ed downwards till almost nothing.


Meanwhile in 100 years BTC will be ½ to next to nothing.

So in the long run the reward fee issue for mining appears to be okay for scrypt

while the reward fee issue is up in the air for BTC say 256 algo.


Myself I was born in 1957 all my kids are dead so I don't look past 2056 I will be 99 if I am around
very likely I will be gone. So it is easy for me to say fuck ordinals fuck nfts fuck confiscating frozen coins and feeding them back to the rewards. No no NO no.

I don't say that as I see a huge problem by 2056.

I do no tis it solved. BTW a 500k coin with .3877 in fees and .0122 in rewards means 2056 blocks are worth 250K

they are worth 196k now

so 500/28 = about 18x the market cap

and only 250/196 = 1.27 the infrastructure to protect that.

makes an attack more effective.

even at 1 mill. a coin

1000/28 = 36 x the market cap

500/196 = 2.57 the infrastructure to protect that and fees will be pretty high

387000 usd a block would mean at the least 387,000/2000 = 193 usd a transaction

and if the block has 1000 transactions 383 usd a transaction

many blocks are filled with 200 to 400 transactions. which means 1000 to 2000 a move for a very basic transaction

it will not work well with out a thriving market in something to be worth moved. (ordinals and NFTs)

LN would become a freaking beast for the system to hold true.

BTW other ideas may come up that will help I just don't see them.

[cryptosize]

BTC will be worth the equivalent of millions of $$$ by 2056.

[philipma1957]

BTC will be worth the equivalent of millions of $$$ by 2056.

Maybe.  but pretend it is 2.8 million in 2056 100x what it is today.

so 0.00000227 x 2,800,000 = $6.35 usd for the smallest possible payment

no ordinals  or nfts all banned.

So if all block is filled with 2000 tiny transaction of $6.35 or say 0.00000227 you could have as little as 0.00454 btc plus 0.0122 reward or blocks as low as 0.01674 BTC at 2.8 million and that means just 46,872 Usd a block no-one will mine so 100 x .5 trillion = 50 trillion in value with less gear than now

even if average fee is 10 sats  a byte  you go to 0.0454 in fees .

Now we know average fee per tx  at the moment is not 0.00000227 it is more like 0.00015  or 0.15 for the block with ordinals and with NFTs boosting fees

so 0.15 + 0.0122 = 0.1622 btc a block or  454160 usd a block vs 175,000 only  2.5952 the earnings for a miners with price going up 100x

so with ordinals and NFTS's doing what they do btc still has issues when it comes to supporting 2.8 billion price.

You can't expect miners earnings to increase 2.59 x 1 when price coins up 100 to 1.

which is the case of projecting out to 2056 and keeping ordinals and NFTs.

never mind dumping them.  Well I will be 99 so why care.  but if you are 30 you will be 63 younger than I am now. So you should care.

[BlackHatCoiner]

so 0.00000227 x 2,800,000 = $6.35 usd for the smallest possible payment

According to who is 0.00000227 BTC the smallest possible payment?

So if all block is filled with 2000 tiny transaction of $6.35 or say 0.00000227 you could have as little as 0.00454 btc plus 0.0122 reward or blocks as low as 0.01674 BTC at 2.8 million and that means just 46,872 Usd a block no-one will mine so 100 x .5 trillion = 50 trillion in value with less gear than now

This is unbelievably speculated. First of all, nobody knows for certain that the "tiny" transactions will be 2000 per block. Secondly, you don't know what the cost will be. Maybe it stays as is with minimum drop, or maybe it gets increasingly cheap as decades pass. Thirdly, if bitcoin reaches $2.8M, then transaction count skyrocketing is a safe assumption to make.

[Wind_FURY]

BTC to slow & expensive
--> just in tecnical its possible

I don't know if you're really a newbie, or if you're merely trolling. Because if you are truly a newbie, then I believe you haven't fully understood that "speed of confirmation" doesn't matter, it's about settlement assurances. Technically one confirmation in Bitcoin is probably equivalent to more than ten times more than a confirmation from a shitcoin.

[sha420hashcollision]

BTC to slow & expensive
--> just in tecnical its possible

I don't know if you're really a newbie, or if you're merely trolling. Because if you are truly a newbie, then I believe you haven't fully understood that "speed of confirmation" doesn't matter, it's about settlement assurances. Technically one confirmation in Bitcoin is probably equivalent to more than ten times more than a confirmation from a shitcoin.

When GOs start grinding empty blocks with doublespends in them on PoS chains shitcoiners will start caring about time to finalized settlement rather than THE SPEED AT WHICH ONE OF THE CENTRALIZED NODES SENDS THE TX TO ONE OF THE OTHER 10 CENTRALIZED NODES

[larry_vw_1955]

BTC will be worth the equivalent of millions of $$$ by 2056.

if inflation keeps going up, it might need to in order to just hold its value...if bitcoin is the same price then as it is now then bitcoin failed.  failed to deliver a return to investors...

[cryptosize]

BTC will be worth the equivalent of millions of $$$ by 2056.

if inflation keeps going up, it might need to in order to just hold its value...if bitcoin is the same price then as it is now then bitcoin failed.  failed to deliver a return to investors...

I'm willing to bet it will be worth 1 million USD by 2030 at the latest.

Some people claim it will reach this fiat valuation by 17 June 2023...

[larry_vw_1955]

I'm willing to bet it will be worth 1 million USD by 2030 at the latest.

i doubt you would be willing to do that. i'm sure alot of people would be lining up to take your money.

Some people claim it will reach this fiat valuation by 17 June 2023...

how much are they willing to bet? any of them put their money where their mouth is? 

[philipma1957]

so 0.00000227 x 2,800,000 = $6.35 usd for the smallest possible payment

According to who is 0.00000227 BTC the smallest possible payment?

So if all block is filled with 2000 tiny transaction of $6.35 or say 0.00000227 you could have as little as 0.00454 btc plus 0.0122 reward or blocks as low as 0.01674 BTC at 2.8 million and that means just 46,872 Usd a block no-one will mine so 100 x .5 trillion = 50 trillion in value with less gear than now

This is unbelievably speculated. First of all, nobody knows for certain that the "tiny" transactions will be 2000 per block. Secondly, you don't know what the cost will be. Maybe it stays as is with minimum drop, or maybe it gets increasingly cheap as decades pass. Thirdly, if bitcoin reaches $2.8M, then transaction count skyrocketing is a safe assumption to make.

It is possible.

I said could have.

Not will have.

First off for it to happen every transaction would need be a perfectly small sized one.



Lets try a better way for 2056

here are 10 blocks made recently

...


https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/blocks/btc?page=1

https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/blocks/btc/785663     just put in any number 1- 785,663 and that block shows up

785,663       0.1527xxx
785,662       0.2281xxx
785,661       0.3494xxx
785,660       0.1664xxx
785,659       0.0724xxx
785,658       0.2208xxx
785,657       0.0613xxx
785,656       0.0523xxx
785,655       0.2567xxx
785,654       0.1067xxx


this sample of 10 is 1.6668 coins or

 0.16668 a block      about 5000 usd at 30 k a coin

much better than 0.095 about 1900 usd at 20k a coin the article you quote.

I do a math in my head. My gut feel is rewards are up to 0.15 per block for the last 2 months.

I am not going to do the math for 60 x 144 = 8640 blocks made last 2 months.

But I do look every day and feel safe with a 0.150 estimate vs last years 0.095

so pretend it is 2056 rewards are  0.0122

785,663       0.1527xxx  + 0.0122 = 0.1649 per block
785,662       0.2281xxx
785,661       0.3494xxx
785,660       0.1664xxx
785,659       0.0724xxx
785,658       0.2208xxx
785,657       0.0613xxx
785,656       0.0523xxx
785,655       0.2567xxx
785,654       0.1067xxx


0.1649 per block at 1,000,000 a coin = 164,900 usd a block right now a block is around 180,000 .


so if difficulty 2x equal and hardware is 2x better we have the same amount spent on protection of assets as we do today

but coins are 1,000,000 and 20,000,000 x 1,000,000 = 20 trillion market cap protected by 10 billion in gear and maybe 20,000 megawatts of energy

So miners would make a smaller profit in 2056.

now if the block had 2x the transaction capability say 4000, the  max transaction would be 152,700/4000 or 38usd  a  transaction.

The issue I have without ordinals or NFTS to transferring old btc 'lost' back to rewards is blocks will be too small value for miners even at 1,000,000 a coin and .1527 btc in fees + 0.0122

SO the setup is not designed to live long and prosper without tweaking it.

and the scrypt along with doge and ltc is design to last hundreds of years.


So ask yourself a system designed to have issues by 2056
or a system designed to last hundreds of years.

What is going to happen.


In fact give me a math example

for 2056 at $500,000
and $1,000,000
and $2,000,000
and $3,000,000
and $4,000,000
and $5,000,000 per BTC that works
up to $10,000,000 per BTC
you can use fees at
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0 coins a block

and block size of 4 or 8 or 16 or 32

gear could be 4x as good.
and diff could be 4x the size.


No example works until you get to block sizes of 32

The fee cost gets too high miners would flee to scrypt

it is 2023 I am talking 2056 only 33 years away.

I have tried lots of calculations and they all suck for the future for BTC.

A gimmick or twist will need to happen.

BTW coinbase going all LN and off book will simply turn BTC into banking.

So playing with NFT and ordinal is not the worst idea.

Anyone want to plug in
for 2056


BTC price 100k to 10 mil
Diff 1 to 8x
Gear 1 to 8x
block size 4 to 32


Show me something that works as well as the current
price at 30k
6.3 a block
diff at 1x
gear at 1x
block size at 4

Everything I do shows crash and burn in 2056

 with the exceptions of a  perfectly done LN with perfect regulation which = 'banking'

or reclaiming dead coins and pushing them out as do over issues.


So I see Scrypt taking over down the road.

[JayJuanGee]

BTC will be worth the equivalent of millions of $$$ by 2056.

if inflation keeps going up, it might need to in order to just hold its value...if bitcoin is the same price then as it is now then bitcoin failed.  failed to deliver a return to investors...

I don't want to get too far off topic (even though that seems to be the direction that you guys are going... hahahahaha.. I will blame you guys), yet I want to say that of course, it is easy to confuse concepts of how much BTC will be worth in the future and the likely (inevitable) ongoing devaluation of the dollar (frequently described as inflation).

I think that many times when we are making predictions about BTC's future prices, we should be attempting to clarify these concepts rather than convoluting them, so if we are now making a prediction of a million dollar bitcoin (or millions of dollars for a bitcoin), then we should be referring to that future price in today's dollar's rather than adding that additional level of complication regarding how much the dollar is going to devalue (or deflate in value) or how much different goods and services will have different values relative to each other in the future (and also relative to the dollar).

Even Atlas's famous June 4, 2011 thread had predicted that we would all be elite gentlemen based on a $10k BTC price, and I would consider that $10k in 2011 would be the same as somewhere between $20k and $30k today (based on devaluation of the dollar since 2011) - depending on which measures you use or which products/services are in your basket of comparative good.

Of course, some of our recent attempts to tie BTC price into the subject of this thread has to do with incentives to mine bitcoin based on transaction fees versus the shrinking of the reward component of mining and for sure by 2056, we are only getting around 2,441,406 satoshis per block reward, and 3.515625 BTC per day, so there is a kind of built in presumption that either BTC prices are going up in order to make up for the known lowering reward amounts, or transaction fees are going up or some combination of those two, and of course, there are so many variables to merely get to those numbers that we cannot really know at this time beyond watching dynamics how the bitcoin foundational incentive specifics are going to work out (and even considering varying macro-factors - including seemingly ongoing attacks on bitcoin - though bitcoin was designed for such attacks).

A kind of presumption of the security of bitcoin's blockchain likely only presumes a doubling of the price every four years in order to maintain its value, even though in the past 12 years-ish of BTC's existence, we have had right around a doubling of BTC's price every year, and likely the current doubling rate of BTC's price is not very sustainable.. but it is not needed to continue at such a rate - and perhaps may not even be needing to double every 4 years as I mentioned in order to be secure and sustainable, yet even with those presumptions of doubling of the BTC price about every four years, we also have other likely adoption and growth of varying bitcoin network effects that continue to put upwards pressures on BTC prices.  

In order for me to make this post, I felt that it was necessary for me to go to my thread and to revise my fuck you status chart.. and I gotta better figure out how to format charts - because it is too much work, so my dates ONLY go up to mid-2035.. which shows BTC bottom prices at $240k per BTC in 2030, $640k  BTC in mid-2035, $1 million by mid-2038, and $5,6439,679 by mid-2056 (I placed mid-2038 and mid-2056 in my fuck you status chart, just for the purpose of reference in this thread).

[philipma1957]

BTC will be worth the equivalent of millions of $$$ by 2056.

if inflation keeps going up, it might need to in order to just hold its value...if bitcoin is the same price then as it is now then bitcoin failed.   failed to deliver a return to investors...

I don't want to get too far off topic (even though that seems to be the direction that you guys are going... hahahahaha.. I will blame you guys), yet I want to say that of course, it is easy to confuse concepts of how much BTC will be worth in the future and the likely (inevitable) ongoing devaluation of the dollar (frequently described as inflation).

I think that many times when we are making predictions about BTC's future prices, we should be attempting to clarify these concepts rather than convoluting them, so if we are now making a prediction of a million dollar bitcoin (or millions of dollars for a bitcoin), then we should be referring to that future price in today's dollar's rather than adding that additional level of complication regarding how much the dollar is going to devalue (or deflate in value) or how much different goods and services will have different values relative to each other in the future (and also relative to the dollar).

Even Atlas's famous June 4, 2011 thread had predicted that we would all be elite gentlemen based on a $10k BTC price, and I would consider that $10k in 2011 would be the same as somewhere between $20k and $30k today (based on devaluation of the dollar since 2011) - depending on which measures you use or which products/services are in your basket of comparative good.

Of course, some of our recent attempts to tie BTC price into the subject of this thread has to do with incentives to mine bitcoin based on transaction fees versus the shrinking of the reward component of mining and for sure by 2056, we are only getting around 2,441,406 satoshis per block reward, and 3.515625 BTC per day, so there is a kind of built in presumption that either BTC prices are going up in order to make up for the known lowering reward amounts, or transaction fees are going up or some combination of those two, and of course, there are so many variables to merely get to those numbers that we cannot really know at this time beyond watching dynamics how the bitcoin foundational incentive specifics are going to work out (and even considering varying macro-factors - including seemingly ongoing attacks on bitcoin - though bitcoin was designed for such attacks).

A kind of presumption of the security of bitcoin's blockchain likely only presumes a doubling of the price every four years in order to maintain its value, even though in the past 12 years-ish of BTC's existence, we have had right around a doubling of BTC's price every year, and likely the current doubling rate of BTC's price is not very sustainable.. but it is not needed to continue at such a rate - and perhaps may not even be needing to double every 4 years as I mentioned in order to be secure and sustainable, yet even with those presumptions of doubling of the BTC price about every four years, we also have other likely adoption and growth of varying bitcoin network effects that continue to put upwards pressures on BTC prices.  

In order for me to make this post, I felt that it was necessary for me to go to my thread and to revise my fuck you status chart.. and I gotta better figure out how to format charts - because it is too much work, so my dates ONLY go up to mid-2035.. which shows BTC bottom prices at $240k per BTC in 2030, $640k  BTC in mid-2035, $1 million by mid-2038, and $5,6439,679 by mid-2056 (I placed mid-2038 and mid-2056 in my fuck you status chart, just for the purpose of reference in this thread).

My childhood home was purchased new in 1956 by my mom dad and my moms grandparents.

cost of 27k

I sold it in 1989 for 227k

It now lists for 1.2 million.

The basement was finished and it is a legal 3 famliy home. It was a two family home in 1956.

So in 67 years it went up 44.44x

this is only about 6.7% inflation rate.

so what is 6.7% for the next 33 years.

30000

turns in 255,004 by 2056


Not sure but It would mean a one dollar fee now would be eight.

but fees worth 8 and equal to 1 now don’t hurt I guess.

If I do a one dollar fee now it does not mean much.

So eight bucks in 2056 won’t be much.

but 8 vs 1 does not fix

.0122 btc vs 6.25 the ratios are not that equal.

[JayJuanGee]

[edited out]

My childhood home was purchased new in 1956 by my mom dad and my moms grandparents.

cost of 27k

I sold it in 1989 for 227k

It now lists for 1.2 million.

The basement was finished and it is a legal 3 famliy home. It was a two family home in 1956.

So in 67 years it went up 44.44x

You sound confused.

In those kinds of cases, it is best that you account for inflation.. .. whether you account for the various prices in "today's" dollars or in 1956 dollars, otherwise it seems likely that you are going to be confused in regards to the relativity of the price versus the value.

I will grant you that between 1956 and 2023, certain kinds of assets held their value better than other kinds of assets.

[larry_vw_1955]

In those kinds of cases, it is best that you account for inflation.. .. whether you account for the various prices in "today's" dollars or in 1956 dollars, otherwise it seems likely that you are going to be confused in regards to the relativity of the price versus the value.

well i don't think it really matters. turning 27k into 227k is only possible using something like real estate. inflation (eroding of the value of the us dollar) that's a given no matter what you do with your money. so all things being equal, multiplying your money by 10 is not bad. what would you have if you left your money in a bank account?