Let's em suffer
Discussion
Let the network security degrade lol? Retard.
Don't know what Difficulty adjustment does? Lol retard.
Yeah the difficulty adjust downward because the network supports less hashrate and the network becomes more susceptible to nation state attecks. Do you know what your talking about?
I think I know more about this than you do... You know what's never happened? Hashrate trending down. So what if a nation state attacks bitcoin? We fork them off the chain and go forward. You haven't thought about this as much as I have I promise you.
Not promised to continue based on historical data because it relies on the market price going up. You won't find consensus to do anything like that. Stay delulu
That's where your wrong. Hashrate can still go up if price goes down. But it's going up forever anyways.
What incentive is there for more miners to pile in for a negative profit margin?
They don't. They'll go bankrupt to miners that are profitable. There's always miners that are profitable. Renewable energy exists...
Ok sure but your implying that there is an infinite growth to energy production? really what we care about is the ratio between nation state energy capacity and network capacity for energy generation
You're still thinking a nation state attack is possible. It's not. If they do, they spend massive amounts of resources for no gain when we just fork them off the network.
And yes, actually we do have infinite growth to energy production.
If it becomes less and less relevant, number doesn't go up then the expense may not be that large. I.e. monero
Fake L2 / centralized coordination creates an incentive problem with miners for sure. With any meaningful scale they'll have incentive to vertically integrate miners and coordinators to start play games where they mine their control transactions and not competing ones or exits.
But that aside, if things remain where they are with sub-sat fees, and price languishes relative to the subsidy with future halvings, the nature of hash rate will inevitably change but not necessarily decrease.
The big industrial miners right now are already starting to pivot to AI, the arb is starting to come out of stranded energy. The subsidy also currently draws in institutional investment that will pay a premium for "uncirculated" coins that have a known provenance and can't in the future be linked to "illicit activity". With each halving this strategy becomes more expensive for these institutional accumulators.
That's not necessarily negative for overall hash rate, ASICS keep coming and each new version is cheaper than the previous one.
Things like Heatbit are a glimpse into where the hashrate will move to once institutional miners start move on, application where heat is the primary output and Bitcoin just subsidizes THAT. Greenhouses, water heaters in your house etc.
This would be better than the status quo today vs. a few very large pools anointed by institutional (nation-state?) capital.
Interesting insights. Hopefully we can solve the bridge problem or come to a consensus on integrating one.
I get into my solution, Lightning.Pub, a bit on the full interview
It's a recognition that casual users are going to end up trusting somebody, so we need to make the tools that allow that to be distributed to the local extreme of the family/small-biz
I'll give it a listen. What about bip300 and bip301?
Bunch of nonsense, they're a little older than the new wave of Fake L2s and have been beaten up already. Ex https://petertodd.org/2023/drivechains
Paul can't even get basic Lightning principles right, shitcoiner clown of the highest order.
i'll give it a read
This is the right approach by putting trust where it should always have been: family, friends, local business where you actually know them. Trusting faceless corporations and institutions is an abomination that, along with fiat, created the problems we are trying to fix.
Theoretically but engineering wise there is a limit and even if it is infinit its about the ratio
Whats your models security budget for bitcoin when everyones using custodians? Seriously brain dead
Why would I advocate for custodial use? L2 doesn't have to be custodial. Lightning isn't by default.
It is by default for 90% of users. Stop ignoring real world usage stats
I don't care about how other people use it. I care about how people CAN use it. Trust me, I'm a huge critic of lightning UX.
Sovereignty for the few who have a stack big enough to manage channels. Custodians for everyone else.
Yes. Part of my criticism. It does not scale Bitcoin to everyone. I can't.
Security budget is Bullshit that people who don't know enough about mining think we need to sustain the network. The network creates its own budget. It's self sufficient.
Care to explain how that works haha?
Oh magic ngu technology? Haha
Technology is deflationary, Bitcoin is fixed. So ngu forever... It's simple math.
Ifff it doesn't become daily money for everyone then its just a collectable
Quickest way to incentives the miners to point their hash rate at a chain fork that has tail emissions? Starve them of all fees giving it to Lightning network service providers instead.
Wait you're saying a trial emission is a good idea to incentivize miners?
I'm saying they will fork the chain to get it because they have no on chain use due to custodians runing lighting
No one will mine a chain that debases its own UoA...
Miner incentives are the most straight forward economics. If you cant get that might as well jump off a clift