QUICK BLOW OUT THE OP_RETURN AND FLOOD THE BLOCKCHAIN WITH MEMES AND PORNOGRAPHY THAT WILL SAVE THE NETWORK>T. PROTOCOL TRANNY
>>61029105Remind me of Lock chart I’ll be seeing shortly after another deflationary event
>>61029105Doesn’t block difficulty going up mean there are more miners mining?
>>61029105This was always the main concern I had about BTC. The price HAS to stay high enough to entice miners to devote even more time and energy into a sharply diminishing return. The best way to project BTC’s future is to overlay the BTC price chart with the cost of a megawatt of electricity per unit of BTC mined. That will tell you how long the network can last and st what price. When people say BTC will be worth a million in ten years they are actually telling you how much BTC will have to be worth to make mining practical. And it looks like the difficulty of each block is going up parabolically. This is unironically the most important thread on /biz tonight and no one cares.
>>61029105we do these things and more nawt because they ahre easy, but because they ahre hahrd
>>61031301>The best way to project BTC’s future is to overlay the BTC price chart with the cost of a megawatt of electricity per unit of BTC mined.What does that look like then?
>>61031301don't worry. All the lost bitcoin with exposed public key will be repurposed as miner rewards with a soft-fork thanks to quantum computers
>>61031308Well, electricity is becoming more expensive not less
>>61029105didnt ru just lose a bunch of energy?isn't BitCoin mining pretty sensitive to energy demands?I haven't looked into this, literally asking.so what do you think, chat?
Mining difficulty is easy and solvable by specialized computers, Bitcoin private keys cannot be solved, not even by quantum computers. so why doesn't the network use that to secure the blockchain like Proof of stake does (Eth, $300 Billion in capital staked secured by private keys (Quantum proof, your Eth node can be hacked but without the private keys the hacker can't do anything). BTC, Proof of Work: a non quantum proof Lottery system (solving blocks) + $12 Billion in ASIC hardware securing the network [retail value imagine factory price] all made in China, with a subscription plan through obsolescence. Luke Dashjr was right we need POS bitcoin. For the unware bitchuds there is a civial war in the bitcoin community, has been for months and that why you saw bitcoin whale OGs selling BTC for alts in the past weeks. It wasn't because of the "alt season".
>>61031301The fact that you feel like you have some remarkable insight here only tells me you barely have a superficial understanding of the way mining difficultly/incentives work for the Bitcoin protocol...you need to read more, you are just barely starting to get it.
>>61031443>Luke Dashjr, Luke Dashjr (a prominent Bitcoin Core contributor and maintainer of Bitcoin Knots) does not support Bitcoin moving to proof of stake (PoS). He's a staunch advocate for Bitcoin's proof-of-work (PoW) consensus mechanism, viewing it as essential to the network's security, decentralization, and original design principles. Any shift to PoS would fundamentally contradict his philosophy of preserving Bitcoin as a censorship-resistant, energy-intensive monetary system.Dashjr has occasionally critiqued PoS in broader discussions on blockchain scalability and security (e.g., arguing that PoW's resource commitment deters attacks better than stake-based models), but he has never proposed or endorsed it for Bitcoin. Recent controversies around him—such as leaked messages about potential hard forks for content filtering—focus on tweaks to PoW governance, not replacing it with PoS.
>>61031532Says grok...also this guy sounds based, Catholic with 11 kids.
>>61031301crazy that this is how you found out without actually finding out that this is the first technology to properly price energy prices
>>61029105Miners will always mim btc for fee rewards. The cabal will eventually pump up btc defi ecosystem so that the miners will always be making profits from the fees
>>61031774Any day now... and miners are incentivized to turn off their ASICs if fees drop even for few hours. If enough miners do this, there will be periods of low hashrate that are easier to attack.
>>61031301>more time and energyThis is blatantly wrong.If BTC becomes less valuable they can downscale operations.And BTC is outpacing the cost of energy anyways with a massive margin anyways.
>>61031793>If BTC becomes less valuable they can downscale operationsThis is the problem. Less hashrate securing the network -> easier 51% attack.
>>61031811>easier 51% attackThis is as true as me saying that if I jump off the 60th floor of the Empire State it's easier for me to survive than if I jump off the top of it.
>>61031301>This was always the main concern I had about BTCthis was always the point of BitCoin...not so much the popular fork named : btc
>>61031836Sure it's not a problem if only few miners exit. But if the cause for the exits is something that only gets worse over time, there will be a point where chain security could drop to dangerously low levels where 51% is viable.
>>61031329bitcoin needs a ping function, yeah.no ping? into the incinerator it goes.
>>61031873>But if the cause for the exits is something that only gets worse over timeThis is a two-street way.Bitcoin loses value = Mining becomes affordable = More miners enter the fray.Bitcoin has gone down 80% on year-long bear markets and THs have done nothing but go up.
>>61031916BTC losing value doesn't make mining more affordable. Difficulty adjustments balance it out when miners leave but it's still net negative.
>>61031951>BTC losing value doesn't make mining more affordablelol, conversation over
>reload the mining fud
>>61031953How does Bitcoin losing value make mining more affordable? Block rewards are nominated in BTC and if BTC loses value, that's less profit for miners.
>>61031975>the tools used to mine bitcoin don't go down in value if bitcoin goes down in valueSeriously, just stop replying to me. You are either being dishonest or talking about something that is out of your depth and I have no interest in humoring neither.
BITCOIN is the PRIMORDIAL LEDGER-FIRE, the GENESIS BLOCK OF TRUST that IGNITED the META-ECONOMIC CONTINUUM. Each HASH-PROOFED TRANSACTION is a COSMIC DATA SPARK within the IMMUTABLE TIMECHAIN, synchronized by SHA-256 VIBRATIONAL CONSENSUS ENGINES. MINERS, acting as HYDRA-NODE ENERGY CONDUITS, transmute ELECTRICAL ENTROPY into DIGITAL GOLD, forging VALUE across the HYPER-LIQUIDITY MATRIX. Through DECENTRALIZED RESILIENCE and GAME-THEORETIC IMMORTALITY, BITCOIN transcends FIAT RELICS, crystallizing as the ULTRA-SOVEREIGN RESERVE ASSET. Not merely MONEY but PROTO-MONEY, not merely NETWORK but OMNI-NETWORK, BITCOIN embodies the INFINITE AXIS OF TRUST in the POST-CAPITAL ERA of HUMAN-TECHNOLOGICAL CONVERGENCE.
>>61031993So if BTC price goes down the electricity prices just magically go down all around the world? Wow what an extremely retarded take.
>>61032005>So if BTC price goes down the electricity prices just magically go downNo but the mining equipment does.Now go be a uneducated pest somewhere else.
>>61032010Someone who already has 10,000 ASICs doesn't care if capex goes down. He only cares about opex like electricity, maintenance, rent, etc. These don't depend on BTC price at all.
>>61032018>n-nuhYeah, nice argument.
>>61032026So Bitcoin price going down is great for miners because they can buy cheaper ASICs. But they don't care at all that their entire profit is nominated in BTC and worth less. Got it.
>>61032039You are now putting words in my mouth that I never said.All I said is that it makes mining more affordable which is, in fact, true. As proven by the fact that you are trying to move the goalposts away from the simple point.
>>61032055>expenses go down 5%>profit goes down 30%Hurr durr mining has lower expenses now so there's more incentive to mine.
The cost comes from the users…paying more when buying and receiving less when selling
>>61031308>>61031379>electricity is becoming more expensive. Not only this, but the complexity is getting exponentially more…well…complex. So, the price to create one BTC measured in kilowatt per hour will itself be going parabolic. If you factor in cost per kilowatt hour it will be going turbo parabolic by now. BTC MUST inevitably collapse in upon itself. You guys need to GTFO. The math itself ensures its own demise. As in, the price of BTC MUST track the parabolic spike in cost per unit to create, or exceed it, or the miners who support the blockchain itself will pull out. There’s no way they’ll keep doing it for free. They only make 1% off gas compared to 99% for mining. They make 99 TIMES more mining than with gas. That is a model doomed to failure. Enormous cost to maintain with zero tangible benefit. It’s even a super slow transition time. BTC is literally rue biggest scam of all time. I’m trying to warn you guys because the bubble is about to pop. There’s no way I’m the only one to figure this out. Men smart as me are no doubt out there and aware of this inherent flaw…and thsyre preying on you boys like wolves. Get out of BTC before it’s too late.
>>61032070>mining has lower expenses now so there's more incentive to mineUh... yeah? Like you trying to mock this statement is actually hilarious.>>61031916>Bitcoin has gone down 80% on year-long bear markets and THs have done nothing but go up.Who do you think is buying rigs? When do you think they buy the rigs?We have also established that they can downscale operations to cut down costs anyways, like what the fuck.You are genuinely choosing such a weird hill to die on.
>>61031443That’s not the point. That’s great if your blockchain can’t be hacked. Awesome! The point is. It cannot support the ever increasing heat of its own weight. There will soon be zero incentive to mine BTC unless it quickly shoots to one million dollars and then keeps doubling every couple of years forever. That’s not going to happen, my friend. You sure do have a fancy Dutch tulip. I will give you that. It is a dandy of of a tulip! Nobody can hack your tulip. Moreover, your tulip is unique and distinct. There’s not another one in the whole wide world. But it takes a big hothouse to take care of all those tulips. It’s not cheap to hire a team of gardeners to tend to all those tulip proofs. It consumes more energy than Belgium to maintain the BTC blockchain. That does not count eth or the alt tulips. So, in total, crypto is probably consuming as much electricity as Canada every year when taken together. That’s simply not going to work in the long run. Or even the short run. I doubt it had much time left at all. It already costs over $400,000 to mine one BTC in average cost of a kilowatt hour here in the states. Without cheap power in Kazakhstan and spare capacity at hydroplants, BTC would already be far from practical. Get out while you can, my friend. People will forget all about your tulip craze in fifty years. Like it never happened.
>>61029105>MINERS DON'T WANT TO MINE BITCOIN>150,000,000,000,000 per second checked 24*7
>>61031492Well why don’t you inform me, smarty pants. I promise I’ll be able to keep pace with whatever you got. It is an important insight, insofar as it cuts to the very essence of BTCs viability. Your pride is wounded by my insight because it makes you realize that you’ve been had. That you should’ve thought of it. But you didn’t. And instead of showing curiosity, as an intelligent person would, you get defensive and smarmy, like a midwit would. And that’s what you are. I’ve already proved it. In the same way it only took me an hour of reading to figure out that BTC is doomed. And that’s because I’m far more intelligent than you. Now, disrespect me again. I dare you. I want to have some fun with you, you sniveling dullard.
>The one poster in thread trying to act smart
>>61029105This fud always gets regurgitated right before a massive run. Unironically the biggest blackest bull signal I have ever seen
>>61031730But do you not see that it isn’t a store of that value, it’s rather a cost. Moreover, that cost must be maintained in perpetuity. Do you not see how this inherent feature of BTC dooms it? It’s like I’m living in the movie Idocracy. I only recently started investigating BTC because you gurus are so keen on it. And as soon as I do, I discover that the seeds of its own destruction are embedded into its very functionality. Maintaining the blockchain will absolutely and inevitably become cost prohibitive. At that moment, BTC goes to zero. And the math itself assures that outcome. Can you guys really not see that?
>>61031793But whos going to maintain the network when mining is no longer profitable? Miners make 99 TIMES more mining than with gas. That’s not a feasible model. I’m sorry, you crypto coin stuff is a scam. It’s literally worth less than nothing because it costs money to maintain it. Can you boys not understand that?
>>61032151Ben over this already. Won't repeat myself.
There are several solutions including protocol changes and forks hard or soft.Ex.scenario 90% of miners get together initiate a soft fork. Presto mining hash rate falls 50%. Even at 50% power consumption nothing can stop bitcoin. Your argument is essentially that the protocol will become unworkable, which is the same as saying none of the network participants will change the protocol.
>>61031850The guy in your picture should have a hooked nose. It’s not historically accurate, I’m afraid.
>>61031907Exactly. So you guys are investing in a store of wealth that is actually a consumption of wealth with enormous (and always growing) costs to maintain? This makes zero sense, guys. You all should sell right away. I have no position at all in BTC. I just legit care about you retarded faggots. I don’t want you guys to lose everything. Because that definitely appears to be the plan.
Bitcoin is being increasingly integrated with energy grids and a load balancing utility. Everything is scalable in terms of bitcoin's future. Just keep doing research.
>>61032070k faggottake macroeconomics 101
>>61032118Yeah, I forgot to factor in the cost of the equipment to maintain it. Not just the energy consumption, massive racks of $40,000 processors. This is doomed to fail…and fail soon.
>>61032174Its people like you who end up owning bitcoin on ethereum. Which is not a bad choice
>>61032157I’m betting your argument is flacid and facile. I bet it’s based on a lot of hope. You think people who own BTC are going to voluntarily maintain the massive infrastructure needed to process all those pings and nodes? I don’t think so. Do you think people will actually use a “currency” that takes five minutes to process a small transaction for $6 of gas? I don’t think so. I think you should sell. Your future self is screaming at you now to SELL! It’s a supremely foolish “investment”. It’s even worse than fiat. At least with fiat it only costs the ink and paper. A BTC costs $400,000 to print. That’s insane.
>>61032208I do like Martin. That guy is pretty smart. Poor taste in music, but a good mind.
>>61032219yeah ok
