Topic: The Halving - Good or Bad for Bitcoin? - page 58. (Read 83082 times)

I think that it is good for the bitcoin currency because price will rise after halving but will bad for miners company.

I only hear calls for buying right now!
We will see pre halving pump very soon!
This is the nature of bitcoin manipulations, don't miss train!

How can it be bad if it was the original plan of Satoshi?  Are miners not aware and prepared for this?  Obviously it will be good for the price, not sure about the other areas.

Nope dude. There is no chance for bitcoin to go down after block halving. Because once halving done mining will be reduce in miners So demand will grow high only. So no need to worry about it dude.

I don't think its bad. Because it will be later more worth.
And if it is more valuable people will sell it.
Or they buy fast a Bitcoin now.

Well the halving can be good but also bad for the bitcoin, the bitcoin will then rise, this is good for the people who have already bitcoin. But I think it will drop heavily after.

If the bitcoin will rise to a record height it will be good for the popularity of bitcoin thats a plus point.

yeah that is an issue, but it can be fixed if they lower the minimum fee(in bitcoin), if 10k satoshi will be worth $40 in the future, they need to lower that to 100 satoshi, i don't know if this si possible or it will rise some concerns

OK, since we're in agreement, my concern is that in the future, the fees will be too high for people to use, especially for micro-transactions and stuff.

I mean I personally don't care for microtransactions, but they are a big value proposition. I only care for bitcoins because I think it has the potential to go up by 100x or even more. But there are some long term worries, IMO, when the block rewards run out.

I don't see the benefit of having a hard cap vs keeping the number of active bitcoins at around 21,000,000 (as in, the inflation rate at the end will be equal to the rate coins are lost through accidents, death, etc)

well it should, because otherwise micro payment will not be sustainable, miners fee will not remain as it is right now, that's my point, they will be adjusted maybe with an hard fork or something

btw it's 50k for each coin, so much more than that, because right now they are earning 32 btc in fee, and they need the equivalent of the reward earning in $, which is 3600 coin x 400 = 1440000 currently

so you need to increase the value of the fee in bitcoin in the future, or the value in $ need to be 100x higher

anyway we are saying the same thing, fee will remain the same in $(or they must remain acheap anyway to allow micro payment), as they are right now, but for this to happen they need to adjust the fee itself

Let's say they need $50k/day of rewards like you said.

The Price of bitcoin will not change that. If bitcoin goes up 100x, miners won't suddenly require less fees per day. If anything, they will require more fees.

So whether the price per bitcoin in USD is $1 or $100 or $100000, the burden of fees in USD value will not change, for users of bitcoin. They will still need to pay that $50,000's worth of fees.

i've already explained above that they can lower the minimum fee if the value of bitcoin get too high, so this is not a problem

10k satoshi is too high? well do it 1k, but this will be only be a concern when the value of bitcoin will be very high not right now, and not at 5k or 10k per coin

and miners, as i said above, need $50k a day as a reward, so this mean that the total sum of the whole transaction per day must give them that amount

this is correlated with the value of bitcoin, ssince you need to change the amount of fee in bitcoin based on that value, so i can't udnerstand why you are repeating that it is not important...

man we are saying the same thing, i was talking about the real vlaue of bitcoin

I don't know why you can't understand what I'm saying.

If miners need $500 dollars worth of fees per transaction, then that's what they will get.

If bitcoins are worth $500 each, then each transaction will cost 1 bitcoin.

If bitcoins are worth $50000 each, then each transaction will cost 0.01 bitcoin.

The amount of bitcoins needed for fees changes as the value of bitcoin changes.

BUT THE REAL VALUE OF THE FEES DO NOT CHANGE.

In the end, whether bitcoin costs a lot or costs very little, miners will ask for an amount of fee such that it can feed their family, and cover their operating expenses.

So the value of a bitcoin is not important, in the context of fees for miners. Please don't confuse the REAL value (i.e purchasing power) vs the value of bitcoins.

When a user decides whether the fees are too high or not, they don't look at a number of bitcoins and go "hey, the fees are 0.0001 BTC, I'm willing to pay that" or "hmmm the fees are 0.0005 BTC, it's too much, I won't pay that".

The number of bitcoins in the transaction fee is meaningless. What matters is the REAL VALUE of those bitcoins.

ho you can say that the value of bitcoin(in $) does not matter, when you're talking about the minimum reward that the mienrs need to sustain the network

you know that this minimum reward will be even lower in the future thanks to the halving, which means that the value must increase, there is no other way around

the value is more than simply important, if anything....

No, you're not understanding what I'm saying. I'm saying the value of bitcoin DOES NOT MATTER. I only used an example to show that.

There are many many factors, I won't pretend I can think of all of them, but I'll try my best to explain what I can think of.

The thing is, there's the current mining cost, and there's a minimum viable mining cost. The current mining cost is what it obviously means. What do I mean by minimum viable mining cost?

It means the minimum amount of mining needed to be done to keep the network secure. For example, if the market cap of bitcoin was $1000, then hardly anyone would bother to try to attack the system, so not much mining power is needed. In fact, Satoshi ran some CPUs to mine bitcoin for a year, and it wasn't successfully attacked.

But if the market cap of all bitcoins was in the trillions or even tens of trillions, then obviously the amount of mining needed to be done to keep the network safe is much, much higher. There is a minimum viable block reward, for which miners will still have the incentive to keep the network secure enough that no one can attack it.


This minimum reward isn't some number of bitcoins. It doesn't mean anything if the reward is 10 bitcoins, 100 bitcoins, or 0.00001 bitcoins. What matters is the real value of the rewards. How many eggs the miner can buy for his family, for example. Or houses. Whatever.

And this real value the miners must make, will be completely the burden of people who use the system.

For example, if it takes $50,000 worth of fees per block to keep the system secure, and there can only be 100 transactions per block, then each transaction must have a fee of at least $500 dollar's worth. Again, it doesn't matter if this number is 1 bitcoin, 100 bitcoins, or 0.00001 bitcoins. That's completely irrelevant. Miners don't care about how many bitcoins they're getting, they care about the REAL VALUE of the bitcoins they're getting.

And who's going to pay $500 for a bitcoin transaction? Or even $50 per transaction? Or even $5 per transaction? I wouldn't, except for possibly very special circumstances. A huge part of bitcoin's value proposition is on how low the fees are. But when the mining rewards are gone, the fees will not be low. It isn't possible for it to be low, unless either the # of transactions is significantly higher, or the minimum viable block reward is very low. But that would mean that bitcoin's market cap is very low, i.e it's pretty much dead.

The halving affects the price, not bitcoin itself.
It's just a procedure implemented by the developers to eventually end inflation.

We really don't know of course, this should be in speculation hehe. But yes the miners will be getting much less, however as others have said if the price increases (I'm not sure that would be the case, for that to happen there should a lot of demand) then the miners will be getting more fiat money out of their BTC.

I think for Bitcoin to grow is much more important to focus on its problems, the Halving is just something that can affect it temporary but the deep down what Bitcoin needs is having an actual demand from the mainstream.

primary thing is price will be in the double the rate due to demand and reduction mining in bitcoin block.

Adaption rate will become high in business world which can do growth for bitcoin. It will get spread to all the people due to its technology and price range when compare with other currency.

the point is that bitcoin does not need to have that value, to be profitabe for miners, it can work at 50k each already if we talk about the mining fee era

nor that i think we can reach that value, so this is only a problem if the value will skyrocket like you said, but at that point i think a tweak to the minimum or recommended fee can be done, like making it 1k satoshi instead of 10k

There is no contradiction. It's like this.

If bitcoins were $100 each, then a transaction fee of 0.0001 bitcoins is not that high, because it would be the equivalent of $0.01.

But if bitcoins were $1,000,000 each, then a transaction fee of 0.0001 bitcoins would be equivalent to $100, which is a pretty darn high fee.

Whether a transaction fee is "high" or not is not dependent on the absolute number of the fee. It's dependent on the value of the fee.

So either way, you either have a high transaction fee, or you need a lot of transactions.

Having a very high bitcoin price does not reduce the need for a high value transaction fee.

Its very good for the bitcoin, bitcoins will be more popular and gets more used by people.
I must say it has positive and negative points for different people.