Conversation

Replying to
The economics of this don't support the kind of paperclip maximizer that it's portrayed to be at all. I think it's likely that the mining revenue stays about the same going forward i.e. price doubles about every ~4 years and people avoid paying orders of magnitudes more in fees.
2
2
More cost efficient miners keep driving out the others, as always. If the cheapest power is subsidized coal (often the case now), they'll use that. If the cheapest approach is running your own power plants, they'll do that. If wind is cheaper than coal, they'll use wind power.
1
3
That's the basic economics of it. Mining hardware gets massively more efficient too, so old mining ASICs lose relevance over time. People won't pay 1000+ USD worth of BTC for each payment so clearly mass adoption would have to be via 2nd layers, side chains, etc. not on-chain.
2
4
This Tweet is from a suspended account. Learn more
This Tweet is from a suspended account. Learn more
Replying to
People who have Tether are short on BTC not long on BTC. They're short on BTC to the point that they're holding a sketchy/risky USD stablecoin because they think BTC price will go down. Really, most are just people speculating on the price and day trading. Not Bitcoin users.
2
1
This Tweet is from a suspended account. Learn more
This Tweet is from a suspended account. Learn more
Replying to
Monero is a PoW currency too. Monero transactions are only cheap because it's not widely used. I have trouble seeing how you can call something useless that is a core part of how GrapheneOS developed is funded and distributes money to developers. Plenty of people use Bitcoin.
1
2
Replying to and
On-chain privacy is important. What Monero gets right is having on-chain privacy that's always enabled. It doesn't imply that it's a particularly good implementation of it with strong privacy properties. Monero is largely used as a 2nd layer on top of Bitcoin anyway.
1
1