Doesn't make it less reliable, either. CDOs are the devil.
I think you may be reading a lot more into what I said than I actually meant, sorry if I was not clear. I was suggesting an imaginary/theoretical 'revolutionary hardware/software advance that makes it much sooner.' As you say, the protocol is engineered to raise the difficulty artificially to prevent being able to ever be "done" with the coin or to make it so far in the future that no one currently alive has to care about it too much right now. That's why I had to imagine a 'revolutionary hardware/software advance' in order to demonstrate my point that it is a pointless endeavor that produces nothing but waste heat, etc.
But you demonstrate no such thing. You may as well consider yourself to have demonstrated that if you turn Bitcoin into a horse, you obtain lawn fertilizer. One cannot honestly look at the history of Bitcoin and claim it has done nothing but produce waste heat without also considering the same of our entire past several centuries of industrial civilization. You may not value it, and certainly many do not; yet, it is clear others do value what it offers, sufficiently to put a very real value on it and transfer value back and forth with it.
From a practical standpoint, as the difficulty in winning/completing blocks (and thereby minting coins) increases and the cost to benefit ratio becomes worse and worse, I have to assume that the number of people interested in/capable of playing the game will drop
Yes, and this is demonstrated in the history of the network, with first CPU mining, then GPU mining, then FPGA mining, then early generation ASIC mining dropping offline in series as they are no longer profitable to run, even considering useful byproducts such as heat or non-purchased coins. The same will true going forward. If the value of the resources spent on mining exceeds the value received, with a typically long lag, mining power will go offline, and difficulty will decrease. It is already well optimized for low cost power, with efficient miner hardware, although one sees a gradual ending of the performance improvements as miners are on modern silicon processes, well optimized. And despite current hardware, multiple year old hardware can still be run in a mode worth running, given sufficiently low power, excess surplus power from local renewables that cannot be exported, or a value for the heat output. It is worth noting that a 1kW miner and a 1kW resistive heater have the same impact on a room, and one does not typically see objections to areas with large resistive heating penetration, even on a heavily renewable grid.
I wasn't really talking about only the math there, I was addressing the way people see it in conjunction with the uphill battle that comes with the difficulty adjustment.and transaction fees (what I called bounty) will increase as the network starts to contract (at least in terms of individuals, if not systems, depends on how the hardware goes, I guess). But eventually you reach a tipping point where transaction costs are unbearable (if it has not already past this point) and the coin is no longer viable as currency at all.
But you appear to not understand that as network mining rate decreases, the difficulty adjusts down such that the block generation target of 10 minutes is maintained. The transaction rate being limited is certainly a valid criticism, and there are subchains such as the lightning network to improve performance on small transactions, but the transaction rate of the network, given time for a difficulty adjustment, remains constant over time. If half the current hashrate in operation disappeared, current blocks would take 20 minutes to complete on average, yet, after the next difficulty adjustment, they would re-target the 10 minute frame. We have seen this work, the network difficulty has dropped at various points in time and the system works as programmed.
https://www.coinwarz.com/mining/bitcoin ... ulty-chart Javascript required.
Expand the chart to a wide span, perhaps 2016 to current, and you will see repeated points in time at which difficulty drops, reflecting a reduction in hashrate, to include the Jul 2021 drop of the Chinese miner exodus, in which network difficulty nearly halved before extending up again.
Once past that point, in conjunction with the cost to keep mining or processing transactions, the entire thing becomes unworkable. You can't mint new coins in a 'profitable manner' and you can't justify the cost of transactions so no one wants to process them.
This is simply not how Bitcoin works. The entire current transaction volume could be sustained on a single CPU core, and the network would continue operating. If there is a reduction in demand, however, fees will drop. Yet, given the surplus of mining hardware already produced, some will be willing to run network nodes even at low or no profit, for the principle of Bitcoin.
That's the problem. Current use and trends indicate an ongoing reduction in use and increasing costs to continue processing and mining, along with a general publicity issue resulting in negative perception, so... why would rewards increase for a less and less viable currency? Why would they even maintain current levels if fewer and fewer people want to use it as currency or trade?
They would not maintain current levels of mining difficulty, and as explained, the network would adapt to the new situation and continue on.
Your hypothesis of a death spiral is possible, and would involve a situation in which there were no longer enough transactions to fill the blocks, allowing zero fee transactions to once again process, once past the point in which there were no longer block rewards, and the value of Bitcoin remained at or nearly zero, yet, I do not believe this future to be likely enough to consider in the lifespan left for me. It will adapt and maintain some value.
*If* bitcoin produced something inherently valuable *besides* the imaginary value of the coin, it would have more stability in the face of bad publicity but it is vulnerable to both public perception and actual practical concerns (hardware and energy costs that spiral as difficulty/complexity mounts and you approach 21 millions coins).
Per this criticism of it, one ought not do anything that used energy "worthlessly." Consider game consoles, can you justify them given this basis?
I didn't claim it would be useless or prevented from being used after the last block is done, I asked if people would want to keep going in perpetuity on a coin that has lost the large part of its perceived value.
This has nothing to do with the last coin mined as a block reward. Either Bitcoin will still have sufficient value to be used, will have transaction fees, and mining will continue to justify the energy costs, or it will have collapsed to zero and remain as nothing but a hobbyist project long before then.
If you told people that the Powerball lottery was no longer giving out huge sums for winners but that everyone who buys at least $50,000 worth of tickets might get an average of $10,000 a year in smaller payouts possibly for up to 7 years (but maybe less), would people still buy tickets?
This is not how Blockchain rewards work, yet I tire of continuing to explain basic Bitcoin concepts a decade and more after it was introduced.
How many will continue to hodl as electricity costs go up and hardware is harder to get and more expensive, especially as the potential rewards become much more 'traditional' (more like bonds or whatever instead of the insane value jumps that bitcoin had)?
Costs to "hodl" are zero. Costs to mine will seek equalibrium with rewards, as they have the past decade.
and it just looks like a really foolish thing to get into, especially at this stage.
It depends on your tolerance for risk and willingness to optimize systems. If your desire is to simply buy and hold, it is like any other high risk investment. If you wish to simply buy a commercial miner and plug it into your house power system and cool it with air conditioning, it is certainly not worth the effort. Yet there are still plenty of profitable ways to deal with cryptocurrency if you seek to do so.
Ahhh, more sweet sweet schadenfreude for me this afternoon as the Canadian trading market Celsius halts withdrawls as part of a larger sell-off. I am a bit concerned that Quebec's provincial pension plan has invested so heavily in Celsius, as it looks like they're likely to lose it all if they don't withdraw soon.
Also, aren't we approaching the Bitcoin value where a lot of large, high-profile speculators bought into it? Like, a certain CEO of a car company and a rocket company with a legion of perplexingly loyal fans who rush to their defense at the slightest hint of offense to their intelligence?
Ahhh, more sweet sweet schadenfreude for me this afternoon as the Canadian trading market Celsius halts withdrawls as part of a larger sell-off. I am a bit concerned that Quebec's provincial pension plan has invested so heavily in Celsius, as it looks like they're likely to lose it all if they don't withdraw soon.
Also, aren't we approaching the Bitcoin value where a lot of large, high-profile speculators bought into it? Like, a certain CEO of a car company and a rocket company with a legion of perplexingly loyal fans who rush to their defense at the slightest hint of offense to their intelligence?
Good! The lower it gets (and stays there), the better!
But why would a pension plan invest in the most speculative, volatile thing possible? :facepalm:
It's this kind of stupid decisions that ends with governments intervening to save the investors, making everyone pay for the gambling of a few.
It's not uncorrelated to market moves as it's a speculative asset that is basically dependent on (retail) investor's appetite for risk built solely on the average citizen's total ignorance about anything even remotely related to economics.
It's a decadent luxuryinvestmentgamble.
Modern crypto is basically pump-and-dump. They trade solely on FOMO, with everybody buying them believing they're going to the moon when where they're really going is to zero when the person issuing the coins/apes/whatever does a rug pull and sells everything they're holding.Indeed, I don't know what to call 'crypto' if we are going to speak generally but my verbs/nouns/adjectives would be 'speculative' 'gamble' 'greater fool' 'bubble'. It is very very very somewhat idiosyncratic risk much as roulette would be I guess in Vegas. But to me, its not an asset or asset class or 'investment'. Its pure speculation. Quite literally, to me, it seems like Vegas roulette.
The only argument that remains for these pumpers is that gold isn’t worth anything either![]()
I mean… if your argument for something’s worth is it’s intrinsic worthlessness than maybe, just maybe you just admitted it’s nothing more than a game with a chance to win. At least gold has historical value however worthless you might think that is, it’s still more than crypto.
It will all go to close to zero once everyone needs to liquidate to cover other losses in this mathematically inevitable GFC redux.
These tiny rate hikes will do nothing but the Volcker approach will make servicing the interest on debt impossible & the Fed will immediately go back to easing. It’s that or a decade of high interest rates which will destroy the economy & democracy either way. This is a pickle. And pickles, in that scenario will be worth more than crypto.
Modern crypto is basically pump-and-dump. They trade solely on FOMO, with everybody buying them believing they're going to the moon when where they're really going is to zero when the person issuing the coins/apes/whatever does a rug pull and sells everything they're holding.Indeed, I don't know what to call 'crypto' if we are going to speak generally but my verbs/nouns/adjectives would be 'speculative' 'gamble' 'greater fool' 'bubble'. It is very very very somewhat idiosyncratic risk much as roulette would be I guess in Vegas. But to me, its not an asset or asset class or 'investment'. Its pure speculation. Quite literally, to me, it seems like Vegas roulette.
Oh yeah. I just wanted to clarify that it's not even a gamble, it's a straight-up scam.Modern crypto is basically pump-and-dump. They trade solely on FOMO, with everybody buying them believing they're going to the moon when where they're really going is to zero when the person issuing the coins/apes/whatever does a rug pull and sells everything they're holding.Indeed, I don't know what to call 'crypto' if we are going to speak generally but my verbs/nouns/adjectives would be 'speculative' 'gamble' 'greater fool' 'bubble'. It is very very very somewhat idiosyncratic risk much as roulette would be I guess in Vegas. But to me, its not an asset or asset class or 'investment'. Its pure speculation. Quite literally, to me, it seems like Vegas roulette.
For the record, I am not a buyer of cryto. I'd buy physical bars of gold to bury in my yard before going into crypto.
They should just use their phony-money to buy an ARM license and a struggling semiconductor company to make a dodeca-Mali based miner factory so they won't lock up global supply of things used by everyone else.https://www.techspot.com/news/94994-ethereum-miners-spent-15-billion-graphics-cards-last.html
Parasitic scum, a cancerous blight on this Earth.
https://www.techspot.com/news/94994-ethereum-miners-spent-15-billion-graphics-cards-last.html
Parasitic scum, a cancerous blight on this Earth.
I don't know why, but your post made me think of thisSome people would also say us gamers are parasitic scum and wasting cpu cycles and time![]()
I mean...sign me up for the literal warehouse full of active GPUs to support my gaming habit.The argument that gaming is also a waste of energy to jusitify mining is so stupid. As a gamer I happen to think this field too, should have a good look at itself and maybe not use inordinate amounts of energy.
This makes my MMO habit in my 20s seem much more sane. It certainly kept me from over-procreation.I mean, think of how many resources it takes for board games given the energy requirements to raise multiple humans from birth and keep them fed, housed, and healthy?
I don't know why, but your post made me think of thisSome people would also say us gamers are parasitic scum and wasting cpu cycles and time![]()
![]()
Oh yeah. I just wanted to clarify that it's not even a gamble, it's a straight-up scam.Modern crypto is basically pump-and-dump. They trade solely on FOMO, with everybody buying them believing they're going to the moon when where they're really going is to zero when the person issuing the coins/apes/whatever does a rug pull and sells everything they're holding.Indeed, I don't know what to call 'crypto' if we are going to speak generally but my verbs/nouns/adjectives would be 'speculative' 'gamble' 'greater fool' 'bubble'. It is very very very somewhat idiosyncratic risk much as roulette would be I guess in Vegas. But to me, its not an asset or asset class or 'investment'. Its pure speculation. Quite literally, to me, it seems like Vegas roulette.
For the record, I am not a buyer of cryto. I'd buy physical bars of gold to bury in my yard before going into crypto.
It's not *just* a pyramid scheme, because there are now public companies based on crypto. It's *also* a pump-and-dump scheme based on the stocks of those companies. The people at the top of the pyramid have both crypto to sell and stock to sell, but the stock has trading restrictions.Most of the people who can give millions to lobbying are presumably at the top of the pyramids but they want to keep the party going?
Not so libertarian after all. (as always)
It's not *just* a pyramid scheme, because there are now public companies based on crypto.Most of the people who can give millions to lobbying are presumably at the top of the pyramids but they want to keep the party going?