Bitcoin Miners Face Leanest Month of 2024: August Earnings Hit Year’s Low - page 3.

EarnOnVictor

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 654

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: larry_vw_1955 on September 01, 2024, 10:53:11 PM

-snip-
1) low fees
2) high hashrate
3) lack of centralization

I don't see how they are going to get all of these at the same time in the future. Pick one but you can't pick all three. Maybe you can't even pick two.

Hehehe...I honestly like to read news like this and I've been following similar ones since 2 months ago, it means that the low fee is so biting this time, miners should get used to it, this is what the system should look like. Mind you, the low revenue for the miners doesn't mean they are still not doing well, they are "big boys" who have tried all they could to gain more in the past, so let the low and insanely high earnings of the past complement each other. They should also know that this is the consequence of the high rate due to the past congestion, it has already pushed many to altcoins for fast transactions and low fees, and many are not returning to Bitcoin again which causes all these. They never thought of the future but were particular about the present gain then, let them get used to it and I hope it lasts.

Regardless, my responses to the above are;

1. It can never be constant
2. I guess it will be moderate
3. Bitcoin will always be decentralised.

Wind_FURY

legendary

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1823

Quote from: larry_vw_1955 on September 10, 2024, 10:39:32 PM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on September 10, 2024, 08:21:59 AM

Has everyone heard the news? I believe the leanest month will get a leaner month sooner or later for less-efficient miners.

so does that mean transaction fees are going up or down? that's all i care about.

?

That has nothing to do with how high or low fees are. Fees go up or down depending on network demand. But what actually more cost-efficient miners mean during the current period of "low profitability" in Bitcoin mining is, it will be harder for the less-efficient miners to profit or to break-even. They will either need to turn off their mining farms or migrate to a region where they could mine using cheaper electricity.

Quote

Plus your post getting a merit from OP is also laughable.

why would you say that? fees are an important thing to keep under control. unless you want a system where only rich people use it.

This was given to me when I was a newbie, now I'm giving it to you.

NotATether

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 6660

bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

Well it makes sense that August prices were the lowest of the year. It always seems to be like that every year. September too. But hopefully something happens on October because I'm not very happy to see Bitcoin under $60k for long

larry_vw_1955

sr. member

Activity: 1190

Merit: 469

Quote from: Wind_FURY on September 10, 2024, 08:21:59 AM

Has everyone heard the news? I believe the leanest month will get a leaner month sooner or later for less-efficient miners.

so does that mean transaction fees are going up or down? that's all i care about.

Quote

Plus your post getting a merit from OP is also laughable.

why would you say that? fees are an important thing to keep under control. unless you want a system where only rich people use it.

Wind_FURY

legendary

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1823

Has everyone heard the news? I believe the leanest month will get a leaner month sooner or later for less-efficient miners.

👀

Japan's largest electricity company will build a facility to use renewable energy to mine Bitcoin.

Quote from: nelson4lov on September 06, 2024, 05:46:37 PM

Decentralization with low fees was the core promise of Bitcoin and not getting that would mean we have failed.

Low fees was the "core promise"? Laughable. Who said that? Roger Ver?

Quote

Imo, those are the bare minimum requirements that we need for Bitcoin to onboard millions and also be the store of value that it has been regarded as in the past. If we want to onboard everyone, fees have to stay low, possibly lower than current tx fees and transaction confirmations needs to happen quickly. I still wonder how we would fair when there are no block rewards to compensate for low fee months like August 2024.

If that's the actual "bare minimum", then why hasn't BCash "onboarded millions"?

Plus your post getting a merit from OP is also laughable.

AVE5

full member

Activity: 350

Merit: 128

Quote from: larry_vw_1955 on September 01, 2024, 10:53:11 PM

So bitcoin users want

1) low fees
2) high hashrate
3) lack of centralization

I don't see how they are going to get all of these at the same time in the future. Pick one but you can't pick all three. Maybe you can't even pick two.

Even in the future it's impossible to get them all especially to the low fee demands. Technically aware, 19.5 million out of 21 bitcoin has been mined and since miners has been playing fundamental roles in the bitcoin blockchain, some few factors is considered against the future pertaining how miners could also be rewarded.
That's why we can't get less than expected on the transaction fee as it's a reservoir to encourage continuities to revalidations of certain criterias in the cryptographical context.
So, the crucial roles of miners rewards in the future can't be comprehend when all 21 million bitcoin has been mined.

nutildah

legendary

Activity: 3010

Merit: 8114

Quote from: larry_vw_1955 on September 01, 2024, 10:53:11 PM

So bitcoin users want

1) low fees
2) high hashrate
3) lack of centralization

I don't see how they are going to get all of these at the same time in the future. Pick one but you can't pick all three. Maybe you can't even pick two.

We have all 3 of these right now -- why wouldn't we have it in the future?

High hash rate is the least important. Bitcoin's hash rate is so absurdly high that new scientific terms needed to be created to measure it. Whoever can mine BTC with the cheapest electricity wins.

yhiaali3

legendary

Activity: 1848

Merit: 1982

Fully Regulated Crypto Casino

Quote from: swogerino on September 07, 2024, 07:18:15 AM

I personally love Bitcoin but have to be honest, some altcoins like Litecoin has a much lower fee and a much faster confirmation in the network, it is what I use in my gambling activities as I don't like that much to wait while Bitcoin is the main currency to use as a store of value, meaning keeping the amounts when the new all time come in this currency.

Yes, I also use the same method when the Bitcoin network fees are somewhat high or there is a time delay in transactions, where sometimes I use LTC or some other altcoins in order to reduce the fees and get a fast transaction.

Many people have started using this method when the network is congested and the fees are high, some of them also prefer to keep the high-value Bitcoin for the long term instead of wasting it on simple daily transactions.

swogerino

legendary

Activity: 3318

Merit: 1247

Bitcoin Casino Est. 2013

Quote from: yhiaali3 on September 05, 2024, 08:40:03 PM

For me I would choose decentralization with low fees much better than centralization with low fees. I wouldn't choose centralization even without fees.

Decentralization and network security must have a price which is high fees, in any service on the ground you need to pay more additional fees to get a good service, so personally I don't mind miners getting some additional fees (within the acceptable limit for everyone) to continue decentralization and ensure network security.

The fees are not that high as long as I see 0.80 dollars a fee to be included in next block which is usually ten minutes or less as not big at all and a fair price to be paid to use this wonderful technology of money. I strongly agree with keeping security at the top and keep things like we have now. I know mining is game over from a long time and that August month is only something below average and normal beside some few months before. I personally love Bitcoin but have to be honest, some altcoins like Litecoin has a much lower fee and a much faster confirmation in the network, it is what I use in my gambling activities as I don't like that much to wait while Bitcoin is the main currency to use as a store of value, meaning keeping the amounts when the new all time come in this currency.

nelson4lov

hero member

Activity: 2212

Merit: 805

Top Crypto Casino

Decentralization with low fees was the core promise of Bitcoin and not getting that would mean we have failed. Imo, those are the bare minimum requirements that we need for Bitcoin to onboard millions and also be the store of value that it has been regarded as in the past. If we want to onboard everyone, fees have to stay low, possibly lower than current tx fees and transaction confirmations needs to happen quickly. I still wonder how we would fair when there are no block rewards to compensate for low fee months like August 2024.

yhiaali3

legendary

Activity: 1848

Merit: 1982

Fully Regulated Crypto Casino

For me I would choose decentralization with low fees much better than centralization with low fees. I wouldn't choose centralization even without fees.

Decentralization and network security must have a price which is high fees, in any service on the ground you need to pay more additional fees to get a good service, so personally I don't mind miners getting some additional fees (within the acceptable limit for everyone) to continue decentralization and ensure network security.

bitgolden

legendary

Activity: 2996

Merit: 1132

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Feels like we are already getting all three? It's not centralized so we are decentralized and that's a good thing, we do have low fees at the moment as we can see from miners making very little as a proof too, and we do have a good high hashrate at the moment as well, it's enough and we do not need more to be fair.

That means we just need to consider how things are not always the same and we can do whatever we want to do with miners. They are not the ones who are ruling the currently system, it is us that decide what's going to happen and because of that I believe that we are going to be fine about this, there is no denying that at all, we need to be just happy with what we have, and as long as we are happy with it, we shouldn't have a problem.

Wind_FURY

legendary

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1823

Quote from: 348Judah on September 04, 2024, 03:38:14 PM

Quote from: larry_vw_1955 on September 01, 2024, 10:53:11 PM

So bitcoin users want

1) low fees
2) high hashrate
3) lack of centralization

I don't see how they are going to get all of these at the same time in the future. Pick one but you can't pick all three. Maybe you can't even pick two.

As i can understand it right from time, this has already been achieved and conquered and still remains the same as it was, there is no compromise with the bitcoin network, all we see and why we maintain the use of it is because of its decentralization, and there is nothing to change that, though you have at least have some point over the fee rates in making transactions, but they are not fixed, we have the mempool congested and the fee goes by order of priority with high fees and when less congested everyone have same opportunity at the same time, so nothing changed about bitcoin, while the future still remained secured.

Ser, the problem IS actually how could the fees support the security of the network if miners' earnings in fees are not consistent. Peter Todd proposed a solution, and it's ABSOLUTELY not going to make many Bitcoin HODLers very happy. BUT I believe if it's a matter of life or death for Bitcoin, it will be changed. It will probably be another hash war, and the community might understand the miners' debate. I hope the Core Developers will be there as the stewards of the hard fork though, and also remain as the stewards of the network.

348Judah

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 521

Quote from: larry_vw_1955 on September 01, 2024, 10:53:11 PM

So bitcoin users want

1) low fees
2) high hashrate
3) lack of centralization

I don't see how they are going to get all of these at the same time in the future. Pick one but you can't pick all three. Maybe you can't even pick two.

As i can understand it right from time, this has already been achieved and conquered and still remains the same as it was, there is no compromise with the bitcoin network, all we see and why we maintain the use of it is because of its decentralization, and there is nothing to change that, though you have at least have some point over the fee rates in making transactions, but they are not fixed, we have the mempool congested and the fee goes by order of priority with high fees and when less congested everyone have same opportunity at the same time, so nothing changed about bitcoin, while the future still remained secured.

Wind_FURY

legendary

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1823

Quote from: larry_vw_1955 on September 01, 2024, 10:53:11 PM

So bitcoin users want

1) low fees
2) high hashrate
3) lack of centralization

I don't see how they are going to get all of these at the same time in the future. Pick one but you can't pick all three. Maybe you can't even pick two.

BUT what the Bitcoin network actually needs to "fix this" - A healthy dick pics and fart sounds market directly built on top of the blockchain, and it needs to be all on-chain. Haha.

That may be funny, or scoffed by many users, but what do those users propose to "fix this"? Plus for those users, what the actual purpose of the fee market if they complain that the fees are "very high"?

TravelMug

hero member

Activity: 2632

Merit: 833

Quote from: larry_vw_1955 on September 01, 2024, 10:53:11 PM

Bitcoin miners faced their most challenging revenue month of the year in August, marking the lowest earnings since September 2023. Onchain fees collected in August also dipped, reaching a low not seen since last year, with a $4.14 million drop compared to July.

https://news.bitcoin.com/bitcoin-miners-face-leanest-month-of-2024-august-earnings-hit-years-low/

So bitcoin users want

1) low fees
2) high hashrate
3) lack of centralization

I don't see how they are going to get all of these at the same time in the future. Pick one but you can't pick all three. Maybe you can't even pick two.

Well isn't it that there are months that due to ordinals, miners are raking huge amount of profits? up to the halving where everyone wanted to get on that block?

So with that, I think they are still in the net positive as far as profits good. But as we have seen, those trying to attack the network, sooner or later they will have to stop and with that, we have achieved your (a) low fees.

We don't want high hashrate, it is what it is, it's a miners war and we are the one going to benefit from it.

There are mining company that close recently if I'm not mistaken, and with that, there could be small miners that can enter the picture, hence decentralization.

philipma1957

legendary

Activity: 4326

Merit: 8914

'The right to privacy matters'

Quote from: Helena Yu on September 02, 2024, 12:46:19 AM

People including myself are obsessed with money (earn as much as you can and spend as low as you can), so people will vote the number one.

Most people don't really care with high-low hashrate, centralization or decentralization because they always happy when government start accepting Bitcoin as legal tender, whales purchase Bitcoin in large sum, leaving their coins in CEX in order to not pay mining fees, staking in CEX rather than earn nothing etc.

At least even though I care with profit and loss, I don't mind to hold my coins in non custodial wallet.

endless low fees will lower the value of btc.

so you want lower priced btc.

I know you will disagree.

I know you may be correct.

But by 2044 or so we will know which one of us is true.

stompix

legendary

Activity: 2912

Merit: 6403

Blackjack.fun

Quote from: DaveF on September 02, 2024, 06:56:37 AM

Let me know when one pool gets above 40% again.
It's 2 pools, one with 10's of 1000's of independent miners.

But also a month ago the stock listed 14 miners had 26.6% of the hashrate, one cycle ago they didn't have even 10%, and they added 17EH/s in one month, they are growing faster than anything else, Marathon has already bought 35Exashash of gear, at current rates 5% of the total.
At 4 cents per th/s there is no way smaller miners will be able to compete in any fashion that it matters, and hobby miners are already done for.

While it might not be as bad as ETH, it won't get better either!

Quote from: _act_ on September 02, 2024, 02:32:07 AM

If any bitcoin miner is no more making profit from bitcoin mining, they should stop mining so that the money earned by miners will be sufficient for the remaining miners. The hash rate will reduce but not to the extent that it will have negative effect on bitcoin blockchain security.

If miners drop then not only does it mean a lower hash rate needed to attack but also cheaper gear available to be bought for and datacenters without a client. so ready available power, Bitmain sells their latest miners for $20-25, used miners go for $5 per th/s, suddenly the security is down to a quarter in $. The last thing needed is some top miners going bankrupt and available to buy alongside their gear at scrap-level prices.

DaveF

legendary

Activity: 3500

Merit: 6320

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: larry_vw_1955 on September 02, 2024, 05:58:59 AM

Quote from: Z-tight on September 02, 2024, 05:39:44 AM

I don't think there is a risk of centralization in the BTC network though.

You don't?

Foundry USA secured 1,248 blocks, capturing 29.10% of the total, while Antpool uncovered 1,074 blocks, securing 25.04% of the share.

This means that two mining pools, Foundry USA and Antpool, scooped up 54.14% of the total $851.36 million revenue.

Let me know when one pool gets above 40% again.
It's 2 pools, one with 10's of 1000's of independent miners.

As of now looking at everything.
1) We have low fees with the occasional spike.
2) A lot of hashrate.
3) More small independent miners then ever before.

They are all using a limited number of pools but that is not a big deal. What pool you use can be changed by miners in a couple of minutes.

Look at it this way, if you want centralization look at ETH where over 80% of their nodes are hosted at Amazon / Hetzner / OVH and other providers. It's like nobody runs their own node at all. (POS or even just for themselves)

-Dave

Z-tight

legendary

Activity: 994

Merit: 1089

Quote from: larry_vw_1955 on September 02, 2024, 05:58:59 AM

You don't?

Foundry USA secured 1,248 blocks, capturing 29.10% of the total, while Antpool uncovered 1,074 blocks, securing 25.04% of the share.

This means that two mining pools, Foundry USA and Antpool, scooped up 54.14% of the total $851.36 million revenue.

Okay, that is something to look at, Foundry USA and Antpool together control a great % of the network's hashrate, but at least that's two different & competing pools, and right now no single mining pool controls >50% of BTC's hashrate. However, i agree with you, the more powerful these pools get, the more likely it is for them to censor and blacklist tx's and addresses based on request from LE and government authorities, i believe that it is the bigger risk than the expensive 51% attack.

Topic: Bitcoin Miners Face Leanest Month of 2024: August Earnings Hit Year’s Low - page 3. (Read 923 times)