On 31 Dec 2022, at 10:28 am, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> This way:
>>
>> 1. system cannot be played
>> 2. only in case of destructive halving: system waits for the recovery of
>> network security
>
> The immediate danger we have with halvings is that in a competitive market,
> profit margins tend towards marginal costs - the cost to produce an additional
> unit of production - rather than total costs - the cost necessary to recover
> prior and future expenses. Since the halving is a sudden shock to the system,
> under the right conditions we could have a significant amount of hashing power
> just barely able to afford to hash prior to the halving, resulting in all that
> hashing power immediately having to shut down and fees increasing
> dramatically,
> and likely, chaotically. Your proposal does not address that problem as it
> can
> only measure difficulty prior to the halving point.
> ... Since the halving is a sudden shock to the system
Is it though? Since everyone knows of the possible outcomes, wouldn't a
possible halving be priced in?
> resulting in all that hashing power immediately having to shut down and fees
> increasing dramatically
Which should cause that hashing power to come back because of this fee
increases.
Alfie
--
Alfie John
https://www.alfie <https://www.alfie/>.wtf
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
