Topic: Bitcoin Miners Face Leanest Month of 2024: August Earnings Hit Year’s Low (Read 910 times)

worse for the environment?

so you live in a cave with no modern technology?.. oh wait guess not, seeing as you use electric too, to be able to interact on this forum

you do realise that the amount of miners are not centralised in one city..nor produce smog.. and if they were they would not replace the electric demand of even a mid size city. so counting the amount of cities in the world and then realise bitcoin uses less than one of those cities demands, you will see the effect is not even 0.1%

did you know that there are more EV cars that use more electric than bitcoin does.. so are you saying that EV cars are bad for the environment, in comparison to say fossil fuelled cars, in comparison to say fossil fuel tuk tuks or fossil fuel mopeds/scooters
so how do you travel? by magic carpet?, riding the back of a giant snail?

so knowing the numbers.. which technology or utility do you want to get rid of

oh and by the way, the UK fiat system(pounds) uses more electric than bitcoin.. where UK pounds only facilitates the money functions of a small island country, where as bitcoin is international.. yep bitcoin reaches around the world but its environmental impact is not even that of a small city

.. your response just goes to show you have alot more to learn about many things, both related to bitcoin aswell as general economics and environmental impact. hope you decide one day to do some research and not make silly responses

things are more complicated than just black and white franky. i could do without your personal attacks/insults though. they don't accomplish anything. but consider this: you like proof of work better than proof of stake. but proof of work is worse for the environment. which do you consider more important? your wallet or the environment. sometimes we have to make compromises to facilitate the greater good for the planet. ethereum has done that and we shouldn't criticize them for it. how much greenhouse gas emissions has vitalik saved by moving ethereum to proof of stake? probably alot more than anyone here has by switching over to an electric vehicle and patting themself on the back..

you have been on this forum for 3 and a half years and your education about bitcoin seems to be equal to someone with 2 weeks research. are you purposefully acting ignorant to be spoonfed information and then ignoring it to annoy people into repeating it.. or are you just trolling?

you have been told things before and then you act like you know nothing. all in an aim to pretend your preferred altcoin is better somehow.. everyone else on the forum (well 98% of them) know that your preferred altcoin is not superior and infact has more issues, so it might be worth you doing some proper self education to learn about bitcoin and your altcoin to realise where you should store your wealth long term..

a hint in May 2022 your preferred altcoin stabilised to shadow follow bitcoins trades the ratio of btc:eth was 1:12 and slowly now its 1:24 meaning that although the alt tried to shadow follow bitcoins trades it keeps losing price pegging strength and cant stay inline at a stable ratio..

eth also has a very low underlying cost of minting blocks and so its difference between bottom value($50) and current price ($2.6k) shows that your preferred altcoin is speculating at a high premium compared to value. where as bitcoins bottom line value in q3 of 2024 ($50k+) and is price ($65k) is nearer to value and a great opportunity, as the ability to speculate to a premium is better for bitcoin, where as ethereum has better odds of falling DEEPLY

i don't necessarily know why wall street would have any interest in bitcoin. nor do i care because bitcoin is not a company that has a product or service. it probably doesn't even belong on wall street. and these people you are talking about on wall street i doubt many of them even own any bitcoin at all. it's just something they talk about but don't really care about. why should they? bitcoin didn't make them rich. they got rich by fiat.


to the extent that they are more informed about current market conditions and what is likely to happen in the next year or so yes i think they have insider information. and once they start selling, it causes other people to do the same thing. which causes bitcoin to drop maybe. if they were smart enough to get involved with bitcoin when it was worth $1 then they're smart enough to know when is the ideal time to sell it.

How do "they" know what's going on? Do you really think that "they" ("old wallets") have insider information? No, they just had a banal desire to sell at the current price. What should you expect if you urgently need money? A completely natural phenomenon and that's all.

Of course, progress does not stand still. New technologies will come to replace blockchain technology and its derivatives. A little analytics is needed. In the modern world, there is access to almost any information.

yet you have in recent months been idolising the staking prospect of ethereum.... have you not realised the reward rate of ethereum staking is far less than 200% per 4 years

anyways lets take ethereums 3.56%/year 'profit' (15% over 4 years cumulatively)
even my basic fiat bank account offers 4.2% which over 4 years is (17.88% over 4 years cumulatively)

the stock market averages 8% a year  (36% over 4 years cumulatively)
so just hoarding bitcoin which per 4 year cycle has and will be better than inflation and other assets.. will pay off just hoarding

bitcoin by its many factors(you should learn about) is and will be deflationary for everyone alive today life time
(as long as there is no large bug that kills bitcoin)

you need to really understand the many factors of bitcoin economics to realise why even the most highly paid economic strategists of wall street have even bothered to invest billions in labour and research and operating budgets to get things like the ETF's activated and operating

...

yes diversifying to not have all eggs in one basket is safe legit advice, yes the future is a unknown path where bugs can happen or other world atrocities or economics take over.. but thats long term investment risk of anything
the current scope of the nearest 2 decades+ shows that calling bitcoin a dying horse this year is far from the truth, its still young and the risk level of hoarding for 4-20 years is far less risk than what you keep implying. 2024 is not a death note, condolence card, its a teenagers birthday card
 

that depends on what else it out there for them to mine instead. i guess. no one necessarily has loyalty to bitcoin. if something else is more profitable and they can mine that instead they'll probably do it. and then what you'll have with bitcoin is a bunch of people fighting for table scraps.
 

i mean franky don't expect to sit on your rear end and become a millionaire without lifting a finger. the world is not that simplistic. that's another thing about bitcoin that i don't particularly care for is how i think it encourages laziness. people just want to sit back and become a millionaire as though it is owed to them just because they bought some bitcoin... now, if it's part of their overall investment strategy and diversification plan to set themself up financially over the longterm then that's respectable. but not just yoloing into something thinking you don't need to work you can be lazy and bitcoin will take care of you.

1. bitcoin has PROOF OF WORK as its block creation mechanism, which means you can make money via proof of work.... unlike legiteums sad preference of a stake coin which he thinks makes him money doing nothing... its good to see him eat his own words and realise his preferred PoS coin is not going to make him a millionaire/billionaire

2. the whole point of proof of work is that the work has a cost and so there is an underlying cost that protects value.. unlike legiteums preferred PoS coin thats just speculation and inflation increased production.. its good to see him eat his own words and realise his preferred PoS coin is not going to make him a millionaire/billionaire

3. i wonder id legiteum hears his own words and realises it when said in comparison to his preferred PoS coin

i do laugh when i see people being swayed by idiots to abandon bitcoin for an inferior coin/token/network that has no proof of work and no underlying cost mechanism to support the value.. but they dont wanna hear that

We have been down this road before; multiple times in fact and one thing that has been clear is that Bitcoin won't be going anywhere. If people need ultra cheap transactions, they can port elsewhere. For me, my biggest concern is how many of these miners that aren't profitable right now will still be here when there are no more block rewards and only rewards are from tx fees?

If they take losses even with block rewards enabled, I'm imagining what it would look like when the block rewards tap stop following. Either fees are raised exponentially and small users leave or keep fees low and miners leave. If this is resolved, I think Bitcoin will be here for a long time. I mean, we already solved block rewards.

i think people who put all their trust in bitcoin are kind of shortsighted to the extent that what you just mentioned. it would be really arrogant and conceited to think that something better is not going to come along and bitcoin will die a slow death. it's just the way things are. no wonder some of those old satoshi era wallets woke up recently and starting hitting the sell button they know what's up. 

use it for what it is good for but don't expect it to make you a millionaire or billionaire without you doing any work. it might not even be a good store of value. in the long term. but i know people don't want to hear that...

And who, in general, says that Bitcoin will exist in a few years? Where does such a probable scenario come from? Just want it and that's it? Well, that really won't be enough. I am considering the option in which something different and unique will come to replace the blockchain technology, meeting the requirements of that time. Why do I think like that? All because the technological process does not stand still and is developing by leaps and bounds. The computer direction is also improving, which is capable of changing the course of history. Yes, it sounds loud, but we should all look at the modern world and understand this.

franky i understand what you're saying about how people will use smaller and smaller units of bitcoin but that is only if bitcoin price relative to the us dollar keeps going up. it can't go up by 200% every 4 years for the next 25 years that is mathematically and economically impossible. the price of 1 bitcoin can never equal to $50,837,316,566,580,000. that's not 50 trillion us dollars franky. that's 50 QUADRILLION US DOLLARS.

no matter what the economics of bitcoin are in the future, no matter anything, it can never happen that the value of 1 bitcoin is that large. so anything else you have to say about that is just inconsequential. keep in mind there's also a possibility that bitcoin doesn't go anywhere that it just stays where it is right now or goes lower.

unlike gold, which for some reason you mention and i don't know why, bitcoin can have competitors. competitors that could come along and take marketshare away from it. so i'd say in 100 years, it's far more likely that gold retains its value than bitcoin does. but that's just my opinion. in 1000 years, gold for sure. 

Revenues will continue to decline as mining complexity increases incredibly quickly and equipment becomes obsolete at exactly the same rate. Can you imagine the cost of buying new equipment? It's simply astronomical money if mining is done on an industrial scale. Not every company is able to buy new equipment every year. It is highly likely that this will be their last step in this business. Alas, but such are the times. They require sacrifices.

in 100 years people are not going to be moving whole bitcoins (thats the point your not getting)
so you emphasising $5trill/btc is like saying a 10k tonne gold bar is worth $460bill so lets kill gold usage

much like we are not in the era of 2012 where even i was normally moving 1000 bitcoin at a time, now i only move 1btc at a time and in the future will only be moving xxxsat amounts at a time

much like ancient egyptians moved tonnes/kg of gold at a time and now we move ounce, grams

you are again thinking that in 100 years the blockchain will be producing more then 1btc reward per block to be producing $5 trillion per block. which you now admit is not feasible in comparison to a countries GDP if you multiplied that across a demograph of holders..

what you need to realise is in dates like 2012 a "whale" was someone with 10k coins+ now a "whale" is someone with 100coins+ because the fiat value moved up, and in the future whales will be the ones with 1btc, then 0.001btc
just looking at the whale position shift of 15 years will show you the shift pattern of the next 100 years
individuals wont have whole bitcoins in the next century.. get it yet (individuals dont have whole tonne gold bars)

as for the other factors you have not understood. its not needed now, but in 20-100 years there will be a flip from reward being main income and fee being a bonus, to a situation where the reward is the bonus and the fee is the income
(there are other economics involved but you still not at the stage of basic economic understand to progress discussions onto deeper economics)

...
as for your horse analogy.. a average horse lifespan is 30 years. you are trying to say that a young 3 year old horse is a dying horse because its life is more than 25 years, so you want to shoot a healthy 3year old horse now because you fear its lifespan of over 25 years is not enough

to you a 10year old human child is a dying human because its lifespan is 80+... so you might aswell kill a 10yo kid now out of fear of it getting old in 80 years
..

i understand you are a ethereum fanboy and have no concept of bitcoins features, functions and economics(as proven in other topics) but it seems you have gone completely blind about real basics that can be found out in just 10 minutes of research.. or just sitting in a chair with a cup of coffee and actually just thinking rationally about real life stuff and the numbers

..

please understand this simple concept
although you think 3.125btc a block is a small number with not much divisions left
its actually 312500000, meaning alot of units per block and alot of divisions to go

the rule is you can't use someone else's equipment you have to buy your own. can't partner up with anyone. only YOU get free unlimited electricity. not for you to share with someone else like whoever that person is you are talking about.

there are already with free electricity. some people who rent their landlord pays their electric bill. i don't see them mining bitcoin...


franky, you're the one that said the rewards go up in value by 200% every 4 years. in order for that to happen EVERYONE'S bitcoin has to go up by 200% every 4 years which leads to a contradiction as I already pointed out since bitcoin can not ever feasibly reach a valuatation of $50837316566580000 in the next 25 4-year cycles.


it's definitely a dying horse franky. once those rewards dry up, you're going to see a mass exodus of miners over to some newer coin that actually pays rewards still. maybe a fork of bitcoin even. doesn't that make sense? 

but it wont be producing 1btc a day, nor 1btc a week, nor 1btc a month so you thinking that it would be producing multiple trillions quickly is in error

in 2124 it would be producing only 9 sats per block as a reward, which over a year would be 9*52500=0.00472500btc a year
also within 12-100 years alot of other economics both on fiat side and btc side would kick in, but yet again i need to take things slowly and spoonfeed the baby steps details first

but can you atleast acknowledge that bitcoin is not going to stop mining this year or this decade and has many decades to go of mining.... if you can acknowledge that concept then we can dig deeper into the more economic details that will occur in the future

so far you think bitcoin in this year is a "dying horse" without realising that in human years its a tween and not even an adult. with far more years to go compared to years already passed

so do you accept the concept that bitcoin can continue mining for more then 120 years and only 15 years have passed so far, so not really a "dying horse"

Are you arguing against your own hypothetical example? You started the post by saying that,


Which is a laughable claim because if someone truly had "free and unlimited" electricity, that would be a golden opportunity to mine Bitcoin with a very big advantage. Tell Jihan Wu you have a source to free electricity and definitely he'll be paying you a percentage of coins mined to give him access. It's guaranteed profit.

extrapolating that to the next 25 4-year cycles seems somewhat dubious though franky.  even you yourself would have to admit that there is no way that in 100 years from now bitcoin is going to be able to keep up that pace of 200% growth every 4 years. if it did it would be worth around $2,013,265,920,000 in 2124. That's right, 1 btc would be worth 2 trillion dollars.


my bank doesn't even pay any interest at all!  

actually my computations was wrong. in 25 4-year cycles, 1 bitcoin would be worth $50837316566580000 thus invalidating that bitcoin can continue to grow.

By locking your coins to staking pools, you take some risks.

Impermanent loss.
Lack of flexibility to sell your coins when price changes big.

Project teams are smart by creating staking feature because it gives people a sweet carrot of promising APR. This serves two purposes: attracting new investors who will bring new money to buy the coin, higher demand I mean; and reducing selling pressure from current coin owners who lock their coins in staking pools.

Stakers can lock their coins for staking without enough understanding of impermanent loss risk while project team members are always ready to dump their coins to get profit.

Could be worse you could be staking ETH that only gives you 3.5% before expenses and that will keep going down as more people stake.
That is the joy of PoS coins you have to keep putting money into it to get money out of it so there is effort and expenses involved.
It's not like some free magical internet money thing. That as we all know never lasts.

-Dave

the reward can still continue halving for another hundred years
yep ONE HUNDRED YEARS

the reward halves every 4 years, but the market price of those rewards moves forward more then 200% in that time
look at the range in the last cycle $15k-$70k thats 500%

meaning there is more money to be made

enjoy
..or stick with fiat that only offers 4-8% a year (17-34% in 4 years compounded)

you would expect the pace of that type of activity to be slowing way down now. its like trying to get onto a dying horse.

The supply of Bitcoin and some Altcoins to be mined is getting thinner. Several countries in the world have opened up large-scale bitcoin mining businesses since 2015 so that Bitcoin and Altcoins that are currently mined are getting harder, this is what causes miners' income to decrease from year to year.

you only get free electricity at your own house and you have to buy the equipment. no partnering with someone where they send you free equipment. the hardware costs alone might be hard to break even on before the hardware stopped working. that would be your biggest challenge. that and all the noise you generate. so you would have to spend money trying to stop the noise from bothering you and your neighbors. and keep a low profile so that authorities didn't try and stop you from running a commercial operation in a place zoned for residential. it won't be as easy as you think!

Free and unlimited electricity? I believe you could mine using older and second-hand hardware if you're lucky to have such an advantage over other mining farms. Because we're talking hypotheticals, you probably could build a partnership with Jihan Wu and tell him to provide the ASICs and you provide the electricity for a 50-50 split on all mined Bitcoins. You're like a quasi-central-bank printing money for free to be distributed.

this is where math always helps out

so lets do it
the average network is 650exa



which is $6318 for 234thash
(650,000,000 / 234 =2.777m)
(2.777m asics equivalent of running on average)

the hardware cost spread over 2 years of 24/7 operating is a hard ware cost per btc of:
6318 *2,777,777 = 17,550,000,000
17,550,000,000 / 105k blocks / 3.125 btc = 53,485

this is the current bottomline of the new batch hardware costs being released this q3 of 2024..
however many miners are using the hardware cost of 2022-3 when they got the s21 range which had a average hardware cost per asic of $4.2k and a price per btc cost over 2 years of $35k per btc

i'm not even sure that if someone was able to get free unlimited electricity that they would guaranteed to be profitable mining bitcoin. because the hardware costs is so high. the hardware might stop working before they break even.

Plus there's mining hardware depreciation and obsolescence. Turning off and limiting your miners to mere eight hours a day loses its opportunity to breakeven on the hardware cost which must be done as quickly as possible. In this industry, cheap electricity is the biggest requirement to succeed. No access to cheap electricity means losing against the other more efficient miners who do have access. It would absolutely be more profitable to buy the DIP, and HODL with the capital and relax by being a passive investor.

True. I think when you struggle to accumulate those Bitcoins, funny enough that we can decide that hash rate has no more become new if implies the CEX with the government developments.

We just want to make the money while risk factors are undermined but literally can not not high fees just also as when we are laid on highily taxations by the CEX even while we have less income.

So number 1 is a most attractive but then, only legitimate Bitcoin earners would fans this factor because they fears no judge when transactions remains a public ledger even when assets is not practical under our full control.

However, while we anticipates on the governments accepting Bitcoin at all cost for wider values and utilizations, we definitely can not eliminate Centralization.

its not just electric.. its hardware cost too
if the 2 year ROI on asic hardware expectation is based on 24hour of sat acquiring.. reducing mining time by 3 means hardware ROI of the asic takes 3x longer because you are getting 3x less sats per day (if doing your 8 hour mining)
to recoup that expense

but now you see why some places like hawaii will just buy coin at any price even to the ATH premium

i'm not sure its absolutely necessary to do the 3x power draw. just run your miner for 8 hours per day and that reduces the cost of your solar system and the size they take up. if you can't make money doing that then i doubt you can make any money by scaling that up. but you are right, hawaii is probably a better place to vacation or buy bitcoin than try and mine it. 

solar is great for normal household power utility.. especially if you plan to live there for many years to ROI the solar investment.. after all a few led room lightbulbs, a tv and a fridge freezer only uses say 1kwh so dont need many panels for basic minimalist living(candlelit nights)

but a asic is over 3kwh so need 9x1kwh panels to be a 1asic hobby miner (average EFFICIENT sunlight is 8 hours meaning 3x power draw to take in enough to use on demand and store for use later of the other 16 hours without good efficient sunlight).. then you look at the limited roof and backyard space to fit them.. and then look at the cost of panels and installation and delivery to remote islands, and suddenly the math shows that you are not going to ROI that panel investment in 2 years at todays bitcoin prices either

researching and mathing things out is great.. try it

if that's the case have they ever heard of solar power? maybe they need to invest in some solar panels on their roof i am sure it will be very much worth it. they'll be saving a huge amount of money.

you live in hawaii and you have strong sunlight all day long and yet you don't even realize that it is the solution to your high power costs. strange.

Good point, ser. It would be good to have a website that shows which cryptocurrencies, that uses the SHA-256 hashing algorithm, are more profitable than Bitcoin at any moment and observe miner behavior in those coins compared to Bitcoin. Plus show those coins' prices denominated in Bitcoin.

It would probably in the mining cabal's utmost advantage if they establish a liquid market of SHA-256 coins that are trading against Bitcoin.

to me hobby miners are not professional miners contracted into mining as a full time task. they just play around when the time is right. they are more likely to jump to crapcoins that are sha-PoW when times are bad for btc profit. and market buy btc when its cheaper to buy coin rather then pay electric at a loss
hobby miners dont do business plans of a 2 year budget, prepaid.. hobby miners are more short term dipping in and out when the time is right


right now there are people living in the pacific islands (japan/hawaii) where electric is upto $0.50/kwh meaning their mining costs is upto $290k/btc if they mined.. so they are not going to mine but will happily buy bitcoin at any price below their mining cost (todays price -> up) because buying from the market is cheaper then mining.. they wont just "mine at a loss" as that is just bad math, bad economics

look at the specific electric costs per state/region/country and then do some maths on electric cost + hardware cost(2year lifecycle) and calculate each state/region/countries mining costs per btc and you will soon see who is a guaranteed market buyer and which countries drop in and out of mining due to the volatility this year of $50k-$75k market and then what countries are doing industrial electric cost mining where they can continue mining even in the $50k range of cost
the numbers will surprise you and educate you more into the sway of sentiment between miners and market buyers

also when you do the calculations of each country you start to see the measure of the max mining costs on the planet, where even the most expensive mining can mine if the price went high enough and would then cause even those market buyers to stop being market buyers where by all the buys would dry up and set the next ATH premium because everyone would then profit more if they mined so the sentiment switches

enjoy doing some math

They can be hobby miners if they have already been in this Bitcoin mining industry long enough, get enough profit and have enough deep budget. I mean they are rich enough to mine bitcoins as their hobbies without any worry on what's happening now and next couple of months because they can spend bills from their deep pockets.

They don't mind facts are going on at the moment and near future, consider mining as hobby but eventually they get profit because after several months, market rally helps them to automatic harvest profit. Several months is only example, their waiting time for profit harvest can be different depends on different phases of market.

Or because they're hobby miners, the incentives/profit are not their actual main motivators when the mine Bitcoin. They will probably continue mining at a loss, then wait until the price surges their operations back to profitability.

Plus some miners might be speculators too, including professional miners.

There is a part that you are missing, do not forget that Bitcoin miners won't want low fees all the time, because higher fees equals to more profits for Bitcoin miners.

A high hashrate will be moderate because the higher the hashrate gets the lesser the profits that miners make, Bitcoin value has to keep increasing for mining to make sense, or some companies have to stop mining and the hashrate will go lower which means less difficulty for mining.

Centralisation or not people don't really care, if they do they won't use any centralised exchanges to trade Bitcoin, most Bitcoin investors are in for the long term profits, not because of Bitcoin decentralization, many people don't care about this.

In the first place, if truly people understand decentralisation they won't want to send their BItcoin into any exchange account, peer to peer trade, and decentralized exchanges are fitted for Bitcoin, not CEX, but who cares? 

1. hobby miners dont move/migrate home just to be profitable.. when the underlying bitcoin costs raise and the market lowers to where the market is down at the value support testing the new bottom.. those unprofitable miners switch off mining or move mining over to a crapcoin temporarily.. and/or then become market buyers of btc because its cheaper to buy coin than buy electric to mine it

2. point(1) then ignites a market bull season, as proven by the previous halvings and ATH seasons..

humans seem to be willing to take alot of abuse and then more on top of that. just so they can make a few bucks. that's going to be miners oneday...  everyone is going to be shitting on them and they will be barely breaking even. what a wonderful world.

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.

?

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.


 

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

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 

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


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.

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.


 

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


 

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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"?

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.

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.

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!


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.

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

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.

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.

Fees have been low for the last month or so, and with the BTC halving this year, miners earnings was surely going to take a hit. However, i think things like ordinals and runes that caused tx fees to rise and miners to earn a lot in fees delayed reports or news like this.
Every bitcoiner wants low fees, but with every halving event and a reduction in miners reward, they are going to depend more and more on tx fees, so if it stays very low, then i think so many miners will pack up their gears and stop mining. I don't think there is a risk of centralization in the BTC network though.

I've seen few articles talking about Bitcoin miners revenue went down, but why there are no articles talking about mempool went empty which make Bitcoin fee gets cheaper and a best time to consolidate the inputs?

But, when the mempool is full and there are so many people spamming the network, we will see articles talking about how expensive Bitcoin fees is instead of talking Bitcoin miners are earn a lot.

They always talk about bad and popular thing.

Do not just relate mining to centralization just like that, what you should relate more to centralization are node runners. Node runners are collecting nothing as an incentive.

So if I have to chose, I will choose low fee. 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.

The Bitcoin users want two things.
1.Bitcoin price to the moon baby!
2.Low fees.
I don't think that most Bitcoin users care about hashrates or centralization. It's totally possible to have a way higher Bitcoin price and keep the transaction fees decent. The blockchain just has to be kept away from useless garbage like Ordinals, Runes and other "the next shiny thing" crypto projects. The hashrate can be adjusted when more BTC miners stop mining. Some BTC miners might have to switch to mining altcoins for several months. Nobody can guarantee the BTC miners big profits. Mining is a business like any other business and no profit is guaranteed.

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.

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.