Real honest Money

[FlowerMatt]

The article implies that mining difficulty drives the price, but it's more complex than that. Due to the effects mentioned in the article, miners will join and leave based on profitability, therefore the hashrate will follow the price to some extent (or rather mining investment per unit mining return).

[1715190558]

1715190558

[1715190558]

1715190558

[1715190558]

1715190558

[666uazan]

The article implies that mining difficulty drives the price, but it's more complex than that. Due to the effects mentioned in the article, miners will join and leave based on profitability, therefore the hashrate will follow the price to some extent (or rather mining investment per unit mining return).

The difficulty drives the cost to mine a bitcoin, which drives the local-minimum price after a burst bubble. Price is driven by a mix of supply-and-demand, but also the price to mine a coin. When demand outstrips supply, price increases well beyond the cost to mine a bitcoin. However, when the market crashes after a bubble, it doesn't crash below the fundamental cost to mine a bitcoin - and if it does - not by much, and not for long.

[FlowerMatt]

Some good points but the conclusions seem a bit confused

[FlowerMatt]

The article implies that mining difficulty drives the price, but it's more complex than that. Due to the effects mentioned in the article, miners will join and leave based on profitability, therefore the hashrate will follow the price to some extent (or rather mining investment per unit mining return).

The difficulty drives the cost to mine a bitcoin, which drives the local-minimum price after a burst bubble. Price is driven by a mix of supply-and-demand, but also the price to mine a coin. When demand outstrips supply, price increases well beyond the cost to mine a bitcoin. However, when the market crashes after a bubble, it doesn't crash below the fundamental cost to mine a bitcoin - and if it does - not by much, and not for long.

Hm... interesting

[Riniaiokl]

However, when the market crashes after a bubble, it doesn't crash below the fundamental cost to mine a bitcoin - and if it does - not by much, and not for long.

Isn't this because, if the prices drops, miners leave and the difficulty falls, making it cheaper to mine a bitcoin? Looking at it this way, the cost to mine a bitcoin falls to the market prices. That is, price of a bitcoin drives the cost of mining.

How do you argue that there is a fundamental cost to mine a bitcoin when there is changing difficulty?

[doo]

Isn't this because, if the prices drops, miners leave and the difficulty falls, making it cheaper to mine a bitcoin? Looking at it this way, the cost to mine a bitcoin falls to the market prices. That is, price of a bitcoin drives the cost of mining.

How do you argue that there is a fundamental cost to mine a bitcoin when there is changing difficulty?

If you have a miner and the price drops the purchasing price of the miner did not change.

Gold, Silver, Bitcoin = Honest money.

+1
Why would you pay someone for doing no work = PoS

[Hazir]

While you can't create something material from nothing but bitcoin is not in 'material things' category. After all it is just line of code. I think it CAN't be fully transparent and stable currency without proper protection. Something that can disappear after one power surge is not really trustworthy...

[manfred]

While you can't create something material from nothing but bitcoin is not in 'material things' category. After all it is just line of code. I think it CAN't be fully transparent and stable currency without proper protection. Something that can disappear after one power surge is not really trustworthy...

Bitcoin is a intangible good just like your shoes are a tangible good. You will have a hard time doing any meaningful exchange of wealth on a global scale with any tangible (physical) good. Who creates a good does not matter, after all when was the last time you made your own shoe. Most people are quite happy to wear a shoe made by a multimillion dollar big company. What matters is that you can be assured fair work has been done, you can not cheat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intangible_good

[CLains]

The advantage with PoW is NOT that it is somehow "backed by work," what gives bitcoin its value is its superior usefulness to that of fiat.

The real advantage with PoW is that you have an independent means of quantifying effort to secure the network and distribute coins.

Unfortunately, in its current state bitcoin has become centralized through mining pools and industrial mining (centralization of mining increases efficiency). Because of this, and because bitcoin uses 10% of its market cap atm to pay the miners, people are innovating and trying new types of blockchains hoping that we hit upon something that can destroy the old economical system and replace it with a faster, more fair, open, secure, decentralized and lower cost system.

Bitcoin is a vision, bitcoin is a dream we all have, and anyone who holds bitcoin can easily "vote" with their money to incentivize research into potential new technologies that can bring value into this helpless world of ours. Not all altcoins are pump and dump scams, many are lead by visionaries who, inspired by Satoshi, set out to try doing things a little differently. Bitcoin does not have to be the be-all end-all. Bitcoin is our basecamp.

So lets explore and figure out how to bring the bitcoin vision into reality. If government corrupts the central mining pools we all lose; if we have ten thousand blockchain tentacles each with new innovations there is no stopping us.

[devphp]

Energy doesn't back PoW, because you cannot redeem bitcoins for a guaranteed amount of energy, like you could exchange bank notes for a specified amount of gold in the 19th century. Gold was then backing bank notes and if a bank printed too many bank notes, it couldn't service all customers' requests and went bankrupt.

In case of PoW coins energy doesn't back them, because there is no entity that guarantees any pay back with a certain amount of kWhs. The exchange rate is free floating. Hence, PoW only has utility value, not intrinsic value. People value crypto currencies for what they can do with them. With that in mind, it doesn't matter for users whether it's PoW or PoS, as long as the crypto does what they need it to.

[2good2betrue]

It's becoming clearer and clearer to see that this is as much a unique selling point of Blackcoin and other POS coins as fast transaction times and interest gained from staking etc.
We should definitely hammer it home that Blackcoin is not just a ruthless, profit hungry lambo-coin, but also an efficient, secure and resource light coin too.

[Tenarlty]

We should definitely hammer it home that Blackcoin is not just a ruthless, profit hungry lambo-coin

In fact we should drop that bullshit altogether. It only makes people suspicious.

[CokeCoin]

We should definitely hammer it home that Blackcoin is not just a ruthless, profit hungry lambo-coin

In fact we should drop that bullshit altogether. It only makes people suspicious.

+1 it was fun for a while but i think that the whole luxury BS has got to go if we want to be taken seriously

[Summer,69]

We should definitely hammer it home that Blackcoin is not just a ruthless, profit hungry lambo-coin

In fact we should drop that bullshit altogether. It only makes people suspicious.

Then they look at the less than fair initial coin distribution...

[RepublicSpace]

We should definitely hammer it home that Blackcoin is not just a ruthless, profit hungry lambo-coin

In fact we should drop that bullshit altogether. It only makes people suspicious.

Then they look at the less than fair initial coin distribution...

You base this claim on what? Have you seen how the initial PoW coins where created and how un-evenly distributed they were?

[manfred]

Proof-of-stake is “fundamentally flawed”. its from AnoyMint's post two days ago https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=557732.msg8166539#msg8166539

[devphp]

Proof-of-stake is “fundamentally flawed”. its from AnoyMint's post two days ago https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=557732.msg8166539#msg8166539

That's only a theory. Not to mention it doesn't take into account different implementations of PoS.

[counter]

While you can't create something material from nothing but bitcoin is not in 'material things' category. After all it is just line of code. I think it CAN't be fully transparent and stable currency without proper protection. Something that can disappear after one power surge is not really trustworthy...

We give what we choose to use as a currency value.  We decide to trust it as a vuable item and store of weatlh. the native americans used sea shells and bartered.  An got along fine, my point is the confidence of the people is what really maters not philosophizing the difference of a tangible currency or the like.

[manfred]

Proof-of-stake is “fundamentally flawed”. its from AnoyMint's post two days ago https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=557732.msg8166539#msg8166539

That's only a theory. Not to mention it doesn't take into account different implementations of PoS.

If someone does a honest fair amount of work and the other stands around with his hands in his pockets, who are you going to pay?

[devphp]

If someone does a honest fair amount of work and the other stands around with his hands in his pockets, who are you going to pay?

I am going to pay the one whose product has more utility value and more useful functions. I don't care what they did to create the product, I care about the properties of product.

I don't agree that PoS developers stand around with their hands in their pockets. I could say that about Bitcoin developers actually, Bitcoin is essentially the same as 5 years ago, not a single function was added on top of the primary function that Satoshi created.

If a PoS crypto follows the same path, then it's of no use. But if a PoS crypto adds new functions, useful to people, then it stands above others. As for miners wasting electricity - that's not work, that's just wasting valuable resources of the planet.