Bitcoin Forum
May 10, 2024, 07:10:39 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Proposal to Address Dormant Bitcoin:Recycling Lost Coins into the Mining Process  (Read 687 times)
mikeywith
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2226
Merit: 6374


be constructive or S.T.F.U


View Profile
August 03, 2023, 02:36:40 PM
Last edit: August 03, 2023, 03:43:25 PM by mikeywith
 #61

Equally important to bitcoin is "be your own bank" and that you have completely sovereignty over your own wealth. This ceases to the case if a small group of developers decide to start siphoning off some of your coins against your will.

Which one is more important remains the question, which feature is more valuable is also a matter of question, is it the 21M cap, or the free storage of coins, hard to tell which one to sacrifice when the time comes.

The same argument could be made when developers start injecting more coins that what you thought possible, we can reuse every argument against the two different methods, they both are "bad results" we just have to debate which is worse.    


Quote
Why is that very likely? The majority of blocks which are currently being mined already take part in merged mining via the likes of RSK.

Work as in (work to solve the problem of mining incentives) i am aware of merged mining, got a dozen of those useless coins, all fees extracted by all the different merged coins throughout history are not close enough to being worth half the block reward, they are essentially useless to bitcoin, and I don't see how that would change.

█▀▀▀











█▄▄▄
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
e
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
█████████████
████████████▄███
██▐███████▄█████▀
█████████▄████▀
███▐████▄███▀
████▐██████▀
█████▀█████
███████████▄
████████████▄
██▄█████▀█████▄
▄█████████▀█████▀
███████████▀██▀
████▀█████████
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
c.h.
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
▀▀▀█











▄▄▄█
▄██████▄▄▄
█████████████▄▄
███████████████
███████████████
███████████████
███████████████
███░░█████████
███▌▐█████████
█████████████
███████████▀
██████████▀
████████▀
▀██▀▀
1715325039
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715325039

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715325039
Reply with quote  #2

1715325039
Report to moderator
1715325039
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715325039

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715325039
Reply with quote  #2

1715325039
Report to moderator
1715325039
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715325039

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715325039
Reply with quote  #2

1715325039
Report to moderator
Activity + Trust + Earned Merit == The Most Recognized Users on Bitcointalk
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1715325039
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715325039

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715325039
Reply with quote  #2

1715325039
Report to moderator
1715325039
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715325039

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715325039
Reply with quote  #2

1715325039
Report to moderator
stompix
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2884
Merit: 6311


Blackjack.fun


View Profile
August 03, 2023, 02:53:27 PM
 #62

In fact, depending on the fiat value (or whatever the representation of the electricity bill then) we could get away with 1 BTC block reward or even less, and still keep a high enough hashrate that makes the network more secure than it is today or even better, so that suggested fee could drop to below 0.25% a year or so, and it could be adjustable based on some variables.

One issue with this:
3 BTC at $60k will guarantee you the safety we have now.
0.3 BTC at $600k will guarantee the same safety.

The problem is that you're guarding in both cases with the same hashrate or miner cost to be more precise an ecosystem worth 500 billion and one worth 10 trillion. So if 3 billion might sound like a lot to attack a coin with a market cap of 500 billion it doesn't sound that excessive when taking down one that rivals the GDP of the USA.

The economics of mining by and large follows the value of the coin, which is regulated partly by the difficulty. Our optimal outcome would be to have a network that has a high difficulty and thereby a high opportunity costs that comes with any attack. If we were to consider the deflationary nature of Bitcoin, it is more likely for the price to increase in tandem with the deflation rate. Whilst for one with an inflationary nature, we would have the price decreasing with the inflation rate.

Case in point, if we do not see high adoption rates by the time mining rewards dwindle even further, it would just be an indication that Bitcoin hasn't been a successful experiment. More likely than not, a replacement of Bitcoin would be readily available by then and it would provide more utility than what we have.

We had a glimpse of that a few weeks ago when the fee paid nearly exceeded the reward for a few blocks!
Was that sustainable the long run, obviously not!

Now there comes the problem with the rising BTC price and the fees that have to prop them up, for sure people like to talk about prices in BTC, that the fee is not in cents but in sat/b but in reality, nobody gives a damn how many satoshi that is but how much $ you have to pay.
With fixed blocksize the math is pretty simple:

Quote
Transactions last 24h
(Number of transactions in blockchain per day)   456,073
Reward (last 24h)   968.75+21.92 BTC ($28,921,512.6)

So 450k tx that need to cough up 28 million, that's 62$ per tx on average!

But what if the BTC price doubles every 4 years to compensate?
As I said above, you're just having the same number of security guards while doubling the area they need to patrol and twice the merchadise!

.
.BLACKJACK ♠ FUN.
█████████
██████████████
████████████
█████████████████
████████████████▄▄
░█████████████▀░▀▀
██████████████████
░██████████████
████████████████
░██████████████
████████████
███████████████░██
██████████
CRYPTO CASINO &
SPORTS BETTING
▄▄███████▄▄
▄███████████████▄
███████████████████
█████████████████████
███████████████████████
█████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
███████████████████████
█████████████████████
███████████████████
▀███████████████▀
█████████
.
tdk2
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 15
Merit: 0


View Profile
August 03, 2023, 03:32:37 PM
 #63

we propose the implementation of a mechanism that gradually and systematically sends dormant funds back into the mining process after a predefined period of inactivity.

Several Swiss banks tried just such a scam with "unclaimed" Jewish assets from the time of the Holocaust. Didn't end well for them.
mikeywith
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2226
Merit: 6374


be constructive or S.T.F.U


View Profile
August 03, 2023, 03:57:23 PM
 #64

The problem is that you're guarding in both cases with the same hashrate or miner cost to be more precise an ecosystem worth 500 billion and one worth 10 trillion. So if 3 billion might sound like a lot to attack a coin with a market cap of 500 billion it doesn't sound that excessive when taking down one that rivals the GDP of the USA.

What kind of attack can one perform to own 10 trillion worth of BTC? The only feasible attack would be double-spend, to perform a 3 billion $ attack you would really want to reverse a transaction/ series of transactions that is worth much more, a double spend attack is not feasible now or with a market cap of 10 trillion as long as:

1- The attack is very expensive.
2- The profit of playing fair is high.


A government carrying out different attacks just to damage bitcoin is something different, you could argue that if needs be, it won't matter much how much hashrate is securing the network, if they label mining bitcoin as a crime worldwide, 90% of miners will shutdown and then it will cost them little to nothing to attack it.

█▀▀▀











█▄▄▄
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
e
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
█████████████
████████████▄███
██▐███████▄█████▀
█████████▄████▀
███▐████▄███▀
████▐██████▀
█████▀█████
███████████▄
████████████▄
██▄█████▀█████▄
▄█████████▀█████▀
███████████▀██▀
████▀█████████
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
c.h.
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
▀▀▀█











▄▄▄█
▄██████▄▄▄
█████████████▄▄
███████████████
███████████████
███████████████
███████████████
███░░█████████
███▌▐█████████
█████████████
███████████▀
██████████▀
████████▀
▀██▀▀
BlackHatCoiner
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512
Merit: 7359


Farewell, Leo


View Profile
August 03, 2023, 07:29:10 PM
 #65

Which one is more important remains the question, which feature is more valuable is also a matter of question, is it the 21M cap, or the free storage of coins, hard to tell which one to sacrifice when the time comes.
They're equally important. Arbitrarily altering the inflation schedule, and collecting a "storage tax" from every Bitcoin address will have the same effect. De-valuating the currency. Collecting "storage tax" only from "lost coins" doesn't hold water, because besides being incapable of distinguishing lost coins, they are pretty much finite, and once collected, you'll quickly run out of incentives.

A government carrying out different attacks just to damage bitcoin is something different, you could argue that if needs be, it won't matter much how much hashrate is securing the network, if they label mining bitcoin as a crime worldwide, 90% of miners will shutdown and then it will cost them little to nothing to attack it.
What one government does, isn't necessarily in favor of the rest of the governments. Quite the opposite. Whenever some government tries to ban bitcoin mining, there appear mining paradises somewhere else.

.
.HUGE.
▄██████████▄▄
▄█████████████████▄
▄█████████████████████▄
▄███████████████████████▄
▄█████████████████████████▄
███████▌██▌▐██▐██▐████▄███
████▐██▐████▌██▌██▌██▌██
█████▀███▀███▀▐██▐██▐█████

▀█████████████████████████▀

▀███████████████████████▀

▀█████████████████████▀

▀█████████████████▀

▀██████████▀▀
█▀▀▀▀











█▄▄▄▄
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
.
CASINSPORTSBOOK
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
▀▀▀▀█











▄▄▄▄█
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!