@Phuoc "Bitcoin, for now, is heading for destruction when inflation stops.
As a self-contained system, this happens when the block reward (plus fee)
decreases faster than the price rise."
Well, the block reward decreases less and less in comparison to fees every
halving. So it seems reasonably
On Mon, 24 May 2021 at 22:32, Billy Tetrud via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Before we can decide on tradeoffs that reduce security in favor of less
> energy usage, or less inflation, or whatever goal you might have for
> reducing (or delaying) coinbase rewards, we
Your analysis is correct.
In perfect competition, profits tend to zero, which means the costs of
mining tend to equal the reward.
Since the reward is fees plus subsidy, reducing the subsidy should reduce
mining costs.
I think convincing other users we need such a softfork to reeuce the
subsidy is
> It seems to me bitcoin's biggest vulnerabilities are either covert
compromise of mining pool operations, or widespread compromise of networked
mining systems and client node
Stratum v2 will solve the mining pool problem. Widespread compromise of
mining systems seems far fetched. That would
If bitcoin were to ever consider changing their PoW algorithm a
little, it seems that would immediately make purchased ASIC mining
equipment partially or wholly unusable to compromise the chain (and
temporarily reduce energy usage without necessarily reducing
security). One possible plan to deter
> > I don't think 99% of transactions need that level of security
> Well you can't get security for the 1% of transactions that need it without
> giving that security to all transactions on the chain. Also, the blockchain
> security created by miners isn't really a per transaction thing
I think security and inflation are intertwined aspects of a monetary system
[1]. They are both necessary. Many Bitcoin articles discussed energy and
security. More energy translates to more security. The other dimension is
inflation. Bitcoin block reward is constant and reduced every 4 years. But
Before we can decide on tradeoffs that reduce security in favor of less
energy usage, or less inflation, or whatever goal you might have for
reducing (or delaying) coinbase rewards, we need to decide as a community
how much security bitcoin *needs*.
Do we need to be secure against an attacker
>> The turn-around time for that takes a population of both users and
>> miners to cause. Increasing popularity of bitcoin has a far bigger
>> impact here, and it is already raising fees and energy use at an
>> established rate.
>>
>> If it becomes an issue, as bandwidth increases block size could
Good morning Karl,
> On 5/23/21, ZmnSCPxj via bitcoin-dev
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org wrote:
>
> > Good morning James,
> >
> > > Background
> > >
> > > ===
> > >
> > > Reducing the block reward reduces the incentive to mine. It reduces the
> > > maximum energy price at which
On 5/23/21, ZmnSCPxj via bitcoin-dev
wrote:
> Good morning James,
>
>> Background
>> ===
>> Reducing the block reward reduces the incentive to mine. It reduces the
>> maximum energy price at which mining is profitable, reducing the energy
>> use.
>>
>
> If people want to retain previous levels of
Well, it is done automatically every 4 years :) It is a self-balancing
system - more people shout about Bitcoin being dirty -> less adoption ->
lower the price -> less energy consumption. Add on top the fact that in
2024 block rewards will fall 50% anyway and someday it will be zero.
I am all for
Good morning James,
> Background
> ===
> Reducing the block reward reduces the incentive to mine. It reduces the
> maximum energy price at which mining is profitable, reducing the energy use.
>
If people want to retain previous levels of security, they can offer to pay
higher fees, which
Background
===
Reducing the block reward reduces the incentive to mine. It reduces the
maximum energy price at which mining is profitable, reducing the energy use.
Bitcoins have value because they are accepted by full node users, from
individual node operators, to exchanges and custodians like
14 matches
Mail list logo
