It's not a counter thought. It's a statement of the bleedin' obvious. However, the difficulty adjustment keeps prices and costs in line with each other to discourage miners from dropping out. Assuming this holds, breakeven cost can be used to predict price.
Token emission is a protocol to facilitate more ideal bootstrapping incentives to be organically hyper-competitive game/information theoretically. Since day 0 the network has been built to incentivize fee markets. See image 2. Source: Original Whitepaper.pic.twitter.com/BNpRuVGSqM
-
-
The idea that bitcoin users rent hashpower from miners is a collective delusion. Miners are the PoW Miners are the backbone of bitcoin, and the battery powering the metronome(protocols) the user symphony syncs upon.
-
I know that. Pointed it out yesterday. Without miners, Bitcoin is dead. That's why the difficulty adjustment is essential - it's effectively a subsidy to miners to keep them mining. But it's not sustainable imho.
-
I can see that frame of reference re: DA a subsidy. Again reference the importance of bootstrapping in an immaculate conception paradigm. Regardless, if we agree on fee markets, how is this DA unsustainable, if its effect effectively neglifies over time?
-
Bootstrapping is a one-off event. It is not required for all time. Indeed the 21m limit means it cannot continue for all time. Eventually, all that remains is a fee market, and at that point transaction costs must rise enough to keep miners honest.
-
Agree. Tho, fee market economics are in play before 21m emission. New trends/loops forming now. See mempool and fee market & volatility last 10 months. The bootstrapping will continue but fade, & organic market forces will continue to build atop the entropically favorable path
-
I don't think that path will be on another blockchain. No other PoW is near competitive, and PoS is a genius scam I wont engage here. No bets on core or what we currently call
$btc, but some branch of bitcoin will prevail.https://twitter.com/FluidFluxation/status/991126891389169664?s=20 …
-
the real competition to Bitcoin is not in the cryptocurrency world.
-
Agree entirely
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
the real problems start when the 21m limit is reached. After that, transaction fees will have to rise ever higher to keep miners honest.
-
Those problems are already being addressed, and have been of focus since early days. Spam prevention metrics were rooted in the same concern, protecting value/scarcity/surprise of contents tx info of blocks. Token emission expires mid 2100's. We will have consensus by 2030.
-
Fee markets are an intentional aspect of system. Feature not bug.
-
Indeed. So if transaction fees rise higher and higher, what do you think users will do? Miners are as dependent on users as users are on miners, remember. And HODLers are dependent on both. Without miners, Bitcoin is dead. Equally, without transactions, Bitcoin is dead.
-
Idk, specific context dependent obviously. Miners will probably increase the blocksize or innovate alternatively to sustain their model. Majority of Altcoin economics are results of side projects by btc whales who are bored/hungry. 2x/SW/BCH/Lightning is not the end of scaling
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.