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.
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 -
-
-
AFAICS they are mainly being addressed by looking for alternatives to PoW.
-
Nah thats just losers/quitters/scammers. The real debate is over the value of address space protocols and tx throughput on bitcoin. Camp largely split over lightning/BCH today. Trival tribal factions that will dissolve/degrade on next innovation/bull cycle.
- 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.