It will likely be $500,000 next week.
And I am willing to loan anyone 1 bitcoin now for only $100,000 as a down payment.
Rock bottom interest of only 1% APR!!!!
Topic: $500,000 per Bitcoin, baby. The math behind it. - page 8. (Read 23674 times)
If BTC were to go to $500,000 in this era it would cause a catastrophic mining bubble:
$500,000 x 25 = $12,500,000 per block = $75,000,000 per hour
$75 million per hour would drive the mining to attempt to use 675 GW. This is about 30% of all the power generated on the planet.
$500,000 x 25 = $12,500,000 per block = $75,000,000 per hour
$75 million per hour would drive the mining to attempt to use 675 GW. This is about 30% of all the power generated on the planet.
So $500k price will not happen now. It could happen in 13 years, when the block reward is 1/16 of 25 bitcoin/block. The electricity cost of mining bitcoin is less than 2% of world electricity cost. The electricity is even lower if you include the building, salary and management cost.
We also need to include the cost saving by removing some of the present banking service.
It's perfectly possible [...]
It's not only possible, it's likely if Bitcoin doesn't fail. Bitcoin's value will be either zero or very very high. I don't think a scenario where Bitcoin continues to exist as a niche currency has a high probability, because its benefits are too disruptive. So either there is a systemic failure and Bitcoin is replaced by something better, or Bitcoin will conquer the whole economy.
I wanna believe your theory 
but, I frankly say .... is it really possible 
but, I frankly say .... is it really possible Everything that is possible IS POSSIBLE. If it's not impossible, then it must be possible. Basic laws of the universe. Is it possible for you personally to get sick ass rich by holding bitcoins? Now that's separate question. Most of you bulls here fail to grab this once in a lifetime opportunity and GO ALL IN. You will get your profit as a nice lottery winning but that profit won't be significant.
You don't have any time at all to test it out and see if you can double your 200 euro investment before investing a significant amount of fiat. If you hesitate, you are already a loser. The honey badger does not hesitate. It is your basic human right to become sick ass rich, now exercise that right.
If we, the bulls, all honestly believe that we have every right in the world to be part of the greatest redistribution of wealth in the history of mankind, then this will happen. It's sorcery and our rulers have been doing this for centuries with their bizarre rituals (reptiles are very ritualistic). We, however, have been dumbed down by the mass media and education system to believe ridiculous shit such as that making career and working hard is the only socially acceptable path to prosperity and good life.
If you go all in, you can be sure that you will be tested by the machine. The matrix tries to shake you out at all cost.
- You will throw away your 10000 bitcoins with trash at time when the coins costed perhaps only 1$.
- You will lose your coins by making dumb assumptions such as that the coins on your address will remain there after you have made a 0.0001 BTC test transaction, ignoring the fact that your remaining 9999.9999 coins were sent to a change address. By the time you realize your mistake, you have already deleted the wallet.
- You will lose your coins because you used Windows OS and a trojan stole them.
- You will lose your coins because you wanted to test out the martingale strategy on satoshidice.com.
- You will lose your coins because you hold them on an exchange and it got hacked/went rogue.
- You will lose your coins because of daytrading. You bought high, sold low and turned into a bitter duck fucker.
- You will lose your coins because you spend them on an ASIC that will mine you less coins than it originally costed.
- You will lose your coins to pirateat40 or similar scams.
- You will lose your coins because you go all in on scam and shitcoins such as the AuroraCoin and PayCoin.
Such things happen only to break your will and play on your petty human emotions in the future, making it hard for you to buy in again. It is demotivating to lose your stash and this will filter out the majority of early adopters who subconsciously believed that they don't deserve to become a rich motherfucker. At the end of the day, it is your personal mindset and description of the world that will determine your monetary outcome. The system feeds on the energy you radiate with the emotions you express as you lose your stash and it will play all the nasty tricks on you to pump that energy out of you. You don't get rich by being so much better and smarter than everyone else. You get it by understanding how this universe really operates. The stuff they teach you at school is mostly deception. They even teach you wrong history, especially about the colonization of America (where the slaves came from, how America got its name, for example).
It's perfectly possible, respectable individuals like the Xapo founder believe it so as well:
"In a video interview with the Wall Street Journal, Mr. Casares says he’s not worried about bitcoin’s own volatility hampering its adoption – though he expects significant volatility over the next few years. He predicts that in a decade, one bitcoin will be worth somewhere between half a million dollars to one million dollars."
http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/04/02/bitcoin-price-to-1-million/
Of course, the dumb ass average Joes that cannot think outside the box and consider any prediction like that as insane, will never make it. They will always find excuses "Oh he's heavily invested, oh this Bitcoin thing will crash". It's what they want to believe so they don't have the risk of buying and holding, and the ones that already have coins will not be able to resist the urge to sell when we are back to 1K or so. The people that is going to make it big within the next decade are only the 1%, which is what makes such a big price possible, because there will be a massive redistribution of Bitcoins in each bubble-burst cycle.
"In a video interview with the Wall Street Journal, Mr. Casares says he’s not worried about bitcoin’s own volatility hampering its adoption – though he expects significant volatility over the next few years. He predicts that in a decade, one bitcoin will be worth somewhere between half a million dollars to one million dollars."
http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/04/02/bitcoin-price-to-1-million/
Of course, the dumb ass average Joes that cannot think outside the box and consider any prediction like that as insane, will never make it. They will always find excuses "Oh he's heavily invested, oh this Bitcoin thing will crash". It's what they want to believe so they don't have the risk of buying and holding, and the ones that already have coins will not be able to resist the urge to sell when we are back to 1K or so. The people that is going to make it big within the next decade are only the 1%, which is what makes such a big price possible, because there will be a massive redistribution of Bitcoins in each bubble-burst cycle.
i cant wait until btc reaches $1 million
Yes, it will take a while to reach $50,000. Many years.
But it will hit $5000 within the next 6 months.
But it will hit $5000 within the next 6 months.
A sustained $5000/BTC price would drive mining to attempt to consume about 0.3% of world wide power production. That is a lot, but at least is it possible.
How much does the banking sector consume of world power, eg servers, atms, branches, minting cash, credit cards etc etc. I think that BTC can repalce 50% to 10% of banking finance sector at least. The Banking sector must be at least 5% and so will consume about 5% of power. This 0.3% is ok. Also mining as heating will be a very good using in cold countries as the power will be already paid for.
Having said that A POS such As Peercoin could take over at this point as it does not face the mining head wind
I've seen the math, and I like the math.
That is TWh/year, not TW. Divide it by 365 day/year * 24 hour/day and his number was about right.
Right. Thank you.
If BTC were to go to $500,000 in this era it would cause a catastrophic mining bubble:
$500,000 x 25 = $12,500,000 per block = $75,000,000 per hour
$75 million per hour would drive the mining to attempt to use 675 GW. This is about 30% of all the power generated on the planet.
$500,000 x 25 = $12,500,000 per block = $75,000,000 per hour
$75 million per hour would drive the mining to attempt to use 675 GW. This is about 30% of all the power generated on the planet.
This seems wrong. The world electricity production 2008 was 20 181 TW according to wikipedia.
0.675 TW / 20181 TW = 0.003%
Quite a lot of energy but nowhere near world production
That is TWh/year, not TW. Divide it by 365 day/year * 24 hour/day and his number was about right.
If BTC were to go to $500,000 in this era it would cause a catastrophic mining bubble:
$500,000 x 25 = $12,500,000 per block = $75,000,000 per hour
$75 million per hour would drive the mining to attempt to use 675 GW. This is about 30% of all the power generated on the planet.
$500,000 x 25 = $12,500,000 per block = $75,000,000 per hour
$75 million per hour would drive the mining to attempt to use 675 GW. This is about 30% of all the power generated on the planet.
0.675 TW / 20181 TW = 0.003%
Quite a lot of energy but nowhere near world production
Got the units wrong.
2. Trezor is very secure and $119. You may not consider this cheap but, of course, the price will drop over time.
My goal with sigsafe was to make an extremely simple and low cost hardware wallet, that will have both low-security and high-security applications. The BOM cost is < $8 and could be further reduced. I don't think we will be launched until the winter, however.
Sure some miners are better situated (cheaper power, cheaper cooling, better hardware, etc.) so they are more profitable than other miners.
You are assuming:
1. That supply of for example cheaper power (and other similar resources) is unlimited and instantly available
2. That supply of more efficient miners is unlmiited
3. That more efficient miners can be deployed instantly before even more efficient miners are developed.
All of these are false.
Looking at averages for the entire network is incorrect except in the static model where there are no constraints (time or quantity) on increasing capacity.
Sure in that toy model the most efficient miner just instantly scales up to cover the entire network and then the averages do apply.
This is also totally unrealistic.
Again, efficiency does not matter.
Look at it this way:
Assume every block is worth $50,000.
The amount of power that can be consumed to produce that block is $50,000 minus some overhead number (real estate, cost of hardware, labor, profit, etc.) The higher the price the more power can be consumed. Power consumption is directly proportional to price regardless of efficiency.
The more efficiently the power is used the higher the hash rate and difficulty of the network can and will be. Efficiency drives difficulty and hash rate, price drives power consumption.
Sure some miners are better situated (cheaper power, cheaper cooling, better hardware, etc.) so they are more profitable than other miners. This extra profit allows them to afford to buy even more hardware - pushing out the less efficient miners who will be losing money. As new hardware comes on line and old hardware is retired the power consumption remains proportional to price.
Also, I am looking at the overall averages for the entire network and looking at estimating the power consumption of the entire network. Local variations do not matter when looking at overall averages.
Look at it this way:
Assume every block is worth $50,000.
The amount of power that can be consumed to produce that block is $50,000 minus some overhead number (real estate, cost of hardware, labor, profit, etc.) The higher the price the more power can be consumed. Power consumption is directly proportional to price regardless of efficiency.
The more efficiently the power is used the higher the hash rate and difficulty of the network can and will be. Efficiency drives difficulty and hash rate, price drives power consumption.
Sure some miners are better situated (cheaper power, cheaper cooling, better hardware, etc.) so they are more profitable than other miners. This extra profit allows them to afford to buy even more hardware - pushing out the less efficient miners who will be losing money. As new hardware comes on line and old hardware is retired the power consumption remains proportional to price.
Also, I am looking at the overall averages for the entire network and looking at estimating the power consumption of the entire network. Local variations do not matter when looking at overall averages.
"Allows them to buy more hardware" and "necessarily leads them to spend all new profits into recycling and building more efficient hardware in a never-ending always forward moving cycle" are two different things. I agree that what you're proposing is a possible scenario, but not the most likely.
We've seen this same scenario play out with the move from dedicated servers to multi-core virtualized cloud servers - the question people were asking with datacenters in 2007 was "how the hell are we gonna get enough power for this?!" and now in 2014 that question seems absurd.
Purchasing, deploying, running, and managing the cap-ex and op-ex of all this new hardware at scale is *costly*. It's not frictionless in terms of time and effort. Having the money to buy new hardware and being able to do so are different things at scale.
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1008
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
why is trezor so secure in your opinion? isnt that hard to prove?
As stated above:Based on several publicly avaiable and testable BIPs.
All firmware is open source.
All hardware is open souce.
But how do you know that you're getting what they say you are?
(I guess the same could be said when you download an executable.)
Does it come with its own RNG? Or do you import?
It has its own built in RNG.
i think it would be cool if you could roll dice and input your own RN.
also, i assume it doesnt have wifi or anything?
why is trezor so secure in your opinion? isnt that hard to prove?
As stated above:Based on several publicly avaiable and testable BIPs.
All firmware is open source.
All hardware is open souce.
But how do you know that you're getting what they say you are?
(I guess the same could be said when you download an executable.)
Does it come with its own RNG? Or do you import?
It has its own built in RNG.
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1008
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
why is trezor so secure in your opinion? isnt that hard to prove?
As stated above:Based on several publicly avaiable and testable BIPs.
All firmware is open source.
All hardware is open souce.
But how do you know that you're getting what they say you are?
(I guess the same could be said when you download an executable.)
Does it come with its own RNG? Or do you import?
why is trezor so secure in your opinion? isnt that hard to prove?
As stated above:Based on several publicly available and testable specifications (BIPs).
All firmware is open source.
All hardware is open souce.
Jump to: