but even satoshi didn't believe in it to skyrocket so fast
Are the new chips twice as efficient?
yes they are, s7 is x2 more efficient than the s5 antminer
Topic: Bitcoin halving to be canceled? - page 20. (Read 33718 times)
i was thinking that the halving would have been useless if bitcoin had risen enormously in value in the past and within the first 3-5 years
but even satoshi didn't believe in it to skyrocket so fast
yes they are, s7 is x2 more efficient than the s5 antminer
but even satoshi didn't believe in it to skyrocket so fast
yes they are, s7 is x2 more efficient than the s5 antminer
If we were to cancel the halving, can we remove the 21mil hard cap as well?
The latter follows from the former
i thought the hard 21 mill cap is to save bitcoin in its value.
Like how we aint a printing press, like the feds do no?
If we were to cancel the halving, can we remove the 21mil hard cap as well?
The latter follows from the former
If the supply is unlimited then how much would cost a bitcoin? it is better to have restriction and a limit on supply as the price should be increased year by year until there are a small amount in market.
If we were to cancel the halving, can we remove the 21mil hard cap as well?
The latter follows from the former
aside from this i believe that the primarily reason for the halving is to delay as long as possible the fee era, and to permit to have a very valuable fees for the miners too mine, otherwise if we were to mine all the supply very quickly and enter the fee era prematurely
miners would not have profit anymore and they would leave the game, leaving the network unsecure
miners would not have profit anymore and they would leave the game, leaving the network unsecure
difficulty will not increase if the price do not increase, so no one can not rely on difficulty and dismiss the impact of the halving, for the efficiency
This essentially means that the current level of efficiency should be doubled at halving, to keep things as they were/would be before the halving...
Are the new chips twice as efficient?
A better efficiency is fully accommodated over time by the rising difficulty, so we are effectively time-invariant in the long run (efficiency vs difficulty), i.e. the halving interval is irrelevant if we still hit the efficiency wall before the halving. In other words, your assumption would hold true only if (and for as long as) the efficiency outpaces the difficulty. Previously, this condition had been satisfied by the new more efficient equipment hitting the market on a pretty regular basis...
But now we seem to be well past that point
What are you talking about?But now we seem to be well past that point
New chips hit the market just this summer. Give them some time if you already want new chips. However current chips are pretty effective at around
0.25 J/GH
Will these new chips be cost effective at 12.5 BTC reward per block (given the price and difficulty we have today)?
if it was done (the halving) every year, right now miners would be fucked basically
So how does it change the things now, before the next halving? If the halving weren't as rare as it is, would the miners have already been fucked by now? If they would (which seems to be your point), I see no reason why they won't be ruined by this halving...
What goes around comes about
it change the thing because they had time to improve the efficiency, now they have a better efficiency and can sustain the halving even with a <<<$100 price, if the halving was every years they would still be with the efficiency of 2011....
A better efficiency is fully accommodated over time by the rising difficulty, so we are effectively time-invariant in the long run (efficiency vs difficulty), i.e. the halving interval is irrelevant if we still hit the efficiency wall before the halving. In other words, your assumption would hold true only if (and for as long as) the efficiency outpaces the difficulty. Previously, this condition had been satisfied by the new more efficient equipment hitting the market on a pretty regular basis...
But now we seem to be well past that point
difficulty will not increase if the price do not increase, so no one can not rely on difficulty and dismiss the impact of the halving, for the efficiency
satoshi predicted that the price would be increased slowly not in few years, this was another reason for the halving
if it was done (the halving) every year, right now miners would be fucked basically
So how does it change the things now, before the next halving? If the halving weren't as rare as it is, would the miners have already been fucked by now? If they would (which seems to be your point), I see no reason why they won't be ruined by this halving...
What goes around comes about
it change the thing because they had time to improve the efficiency, now they have a better efficiency and can sustain the halving even with a <<<$100 price, if the halving was every years they would still be with the efficiency of 2011....
A better efficiency is fully accommodated over time by the rising difficulty, so we are effectively time-invariant in the long run (efficiency vs difficulty), i.e. the halving interval is irrelevant if we still hit the efficiency wall before the halving. In other words, your assumption would hold true only if (and for as long as) the efficiency outpaces the difficulty. Previously, this condition had been satisfied by the new more efficient equipment hitting the market on a pretty regular basis...
But now we seem to be well past that point
New chips hit the market just this summer. Give them some time if you already want new chips. However current chips are pretty effective at around
0.25 J/GH
If we were to cancel the halving, can we remove the 21mil hard cap as well?
if it was done (the halving) every year, right now miners would be fucked basically
So how does it change the things now, before the next halving? If the halving weren't as rare as it is, would the miners have already been fucked by now? If they would (which seems to be your point), I see no reason why they won't be ruined by this halving...
What goes around comes about
it change the thing because they had time to improve the efficiency, now they have a better efficiency and can sustain the halving even with a <<<$100 price, if the halving was every years they would still be with the efficiency of 2011....
A better efficiency is fully accommodated over time by the rising difficulty, so we are effectively time-invariant in the long run (efficiency vs difficulty), i.e. the halving interval is irrelevant if we still hit the efficiency wall before the halving. In other words, your assumption would hold true only if (and for as long as) the efficiency outpaces the difficulty. Previously, this condition had been satisfied by the new more efficient equipment hitting the market on a pretty regular basis...
But now we seem to be well past that point
if it was done (the halving) every year, right now miners would be fucked basically
So how does it change the things now, before the next halving? If the halving weren't as rare as it is, would the miners have already been fucked by now? If they would (which seems to be your point), I see no reason why they won't be ruined by this halving...
What goes around comes about
it change the thing because they had time to improve the efficiency, now they have a better efficiency and can sustain the halving even with a <<<$100 price, if the halving was every years they would still be with the efficiency of 2011....
what happened to doge?
and how old is doge really
and how old is doge really
They decapped it, lol. It was first meant to have a fixed number of coins ultimately mined (like Bitcoin), but the community (or developers behind it) was prudent and insightful to change the algorithms in Dogecoin at an early stage, so that there is no limit as to how many dogecoins can be produced...
It's been around for two years already (first introduced on December 8, 2013)
Why is this at page 13....
I'm against the halving too. I think all major pools should fork bitcoin to not-halving version which will be supported in the future to maintain miners profits.
I don't see why you want to do that at all? Lower supply means higher demands for bitcoin so the price will increase which pumps the price of itThe falsity of this assumption has been explained many times already (me included). Quoting myself again:
Miners will produce only half the amount of bitcoins after the halving, but this doesn't in the least mean that the total supply of coins will diminish accordingly since they don't sell all their coins even now (when reward is high), and they are not the only ones who sell bitcoins. Given that a) they can't increase production (i.e. the number of new blocks found per unit of time, which could potentially offset the drop in reward), and b) they may actually begin suffering losses due to lower reward per block (I don't expect their profit margins to be high due to tight competition), I see it as mostly inevitable that they will have to sell more coins than they sold before the halving (i.e. now sell), in order to cover their expenses (which remain the same per block)
Once the Bitcoin halving occurs, miners will get half as much what they earned before the halving. If their profit margins are not high enough to cover their operating expenses with twice as less (yeah) revenue, they will bear losses and will have to cease mining. But if, nevertheless, their profit margins are high (and they already got back their capital expenditures), then they don't need to sell all their coins in the first place
In short, life is not what it seems
if it was done (the halving) every year, right now miners would be fucked basically
So how does it change the things now, before the next halving? If the halving weren't as rare as it is, would the miners have already been fucked by now? If they would (which seems to be your point), I see no reason why they won't be ruined by this halving...
What goes around comes about
It is a mandatory step in the development of the network and prosperity of bitcoin. So yes it won't be cancelled.
The title is misleading and since it suggest a eventual cancellation which is not true. A better title would be. Should the halving be cancelled?
The title is misleading and since it suggest a eventual cancellation which is not true. A better title would be. Should the halving be cancelled?
That's what I think should happen and assume will happen ("unless miners want to kill bitcoin"). My logic is flawless, lol. If the halving is so beneficial for the "prosperity of bitcoin", why not cancel the miners reward altogether?
Fly me to the moon
because satoshi wanted that the reward was spread in a long time to permit adoption to take off, and to permit the efficiency to catch the reward itself
Okay, Bitcoin took off (at least, that's what they all say), so its time to cancel the halving? Or did it?
If it didn't make it, what is the metric we should look at?
I'm against the halving too. I think all major pools should fork bitcoin to not-halving version which will be supported in the future to maintain miners profits.
I don't see why you want to do that at all? Lower supply means higher demands for bitcoin so the price will increase which pumps the price of it It is a mandatory step in the development of the network and prosperity of bitcoin. So yes it won't be cancelled.
The title is misleading and since it suggest a eventual cancellation which is not true. A better title would be. Should the halving be cancelled?
The title is misleading and since it suggest a eventual cancellation which is not true. A better title would be. Should the halving be cancelled?
That's what I think should happen and assume will happen ("unless miners want to kill bitcoin"). My logic is flawless, lol. If the halving is so beneficial for the "prosperity of bitcoin", why not cancel the miners reward altogether?
Fly me to the moon
because satoshi wanted that the reward was spread in a long time to permit adoption to take off, and to permit the efficiency to catch the reward itself
if it was done (the halving) every year, right now miners would be fucked basically
I'm against the halving too. I think all major pools should fork bitcoin to not-halving version which will be supported in the future to maintain miners profits.
There was much hype about the Fed raising interest rates in 2015, but we are still there, at the lowest possible level (wtf, it is even no longer the lowest possible limit). Bitcoin halving in July, 2016, is talked about as much, but will it really happen?
I ain't sure
I ain't sure
There will not be any halving anymore.Bitcoin will have doublings in the future.
And the 21M coins limit raised or totally abandoned (like it happened with Dogecoin in the past)...
what happened to doge?
and how old is doge really
Jump to: