Topic: How many Bitcoins does it cost to maintain the Bitcoin network? (Read 886 times)
You are asking a question here or linking us to the answer?It would be more kind act if you would make it clear on your thread topic
legendary
Activity: 2884
Merit: 1115
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
I guess a better question is how much does it cost to maintain the Bitcoin network in comparison to how much it costs to print currencies and maintain the current financial system by off-shoot since he mentioned processing fees he must also consider the same costs for these services in the present. With the costs of hard locations such as banks.
For example, miners (the labor force) are continually competing in a process of 'burning' one type of good (bitcoin) to make the same good (bitcoin). That is to say, they continually have to expend value somewhere with the goal of receiving an equal or larger amount of value in return.
In that case let this be quite clear if bankers (The labor force) are continually competing in a process of providing one type of good (money) to make the same good (money). That is to say, they continually have to expend value somewhere with the goal of receiving an equal or larger amount of value in return.
Let us be quite clear: if Bitcoin was a cheaper or more efficient transaction method, for-profit organizations such as large payment processors would have forked it long ago and would likely already be using it internally in order to shore up their margins.
If a nascent six year old technology could do all that I would be impressed, his preposition is ridiculous organizations are just starting to get into it now who would rely on an unproven technology immediately after it was created.
That said the network keeps increasing the efficiency per unit and electrical costs to mining, as more mining farms start commercializing it will be possible that the hashrate would as well.
As difficulty would only spike when new hardware is replaced in the farms.
In other words I am not convinced by his arguments.
For example, miners (the labor force) are continually competing in a process of 'burning' one type of good (bitcoin) to make the same good (bitcoin). That is to say, they continually have to expend value somewhere with the goal of receiving an equal or larger amount of value in return.
In that case let this be quite clear if bankers (The labor force) are continually competing in a process of providing one type of good (money) to make the same good (money). That is to say, they continually have to expend value somewhere with the goal of receiving an equal or larger amount of value in return.
Let us be quite clear: if Bitcoin was a cheaper or more efficient transaction method, for-profit organizations such as large payment processors would have forked it long ago and would likely already be using it internally in order to shore up their margins.
If a nascent six year old technology could do all that I would be impressed, his preposition is ridiculous organizations are just starting to get into it now who would rely on an unproven technology immediately after it was created.
That said the network keeps increasing the efficiency per unit and electrical costs to mining, as more mining farms start commercializing it will be possible that the hashrate would as well.
As difficulty would only spike when new hardware is replaced in the farms.
In other words I am not convinced by his arguments.
Jump to: