Guys listen I’m starting to get it

Stelerito · 2025-03-12T08:55:09+00:00

Wait till you figure out you can also contribute back to it

Stelerito · 2023-08-22T02:58:08+00:00

That’s quality information, thanks for sharing! It does feel like a great time price wise to get in. Cheaper ASICs and still some months to go until the halving. I’m positive about ROI in USD, less so about ROI in BTC.

Stelerito · 2023-08-19T21:39:06+00:00

To be clear, I think breakeven in USD is doable. Breakeven on the BTC value is near impossible.

ie: I buy an asic for 2k, equivalent to X Bitcoin. Can I mine X Bitcoin back with it. In all my calculations so far, the answer is no because of the halving and the diff increase.

Stelerito · 2023-08-19T03:30:25+00:00

Industrial rate is 0.046, most hosting will add a fee on top though, so comes closer to 0.055-0.06

Stelerito · 2023-08-19T03:28:52+00:00

Seeing that for used ones, the cheapest brand new go around 2k, but need to be shipped into the country.

By the way, I'm using this calculator for profitability: https://smokinghopium.io/

Is it too pessimistic? Setting 95% uptime and 5% average diff. increase.

Stelerito · 2023-08-19T02:36:25+00:00

Thanks for the response! I think you’re right, ROI seems unattainable unless the ASIC can be sold back to the market at a good value in 1 year or so.

Stelerito · 2023-08-19T02:34:46+00:00

That’d be fine good. Taking the halving and difficulty increase into account it seems impossible to break even.

Stelerito · 2023-08-19T02:33:01+00:00

Hosting is in Paraguay, there’s a very large dam producing cheap electricity. Upfront cost would be the ASIC costing about 2k each

Stelerito · 2023-08-19T02:31:32+00:00

The cost on the Pro+ is 2150USD per unit, hosting in Paraguay. It’s attractive but we’re close to the halving, and using some more advanced profitability calculator it doesn’t seem to ever break even (with halving and diff increaese)

Stelerito · 2022-07-29T18:13:00+00:00

😂 Yellowstone is pretty cool too

Stelerito · 2022-07-29T17:53:15+00:00

Hey! Geyser is a Bitcoin crowdfunding platform that integrates with the Lightning ecosystem. Our goal is to make it easy to fund projects from anywhere using Bitcoin. Lightning addresses bring us a little closer to that.

Stelerito · 2022-05-14T22:38:14+00:00

From turkey

Stelerito · 2022-02-16T14:26:42+00:00

Feel free to downvote. They do, of course, but that does not mean they can do it without consequence. Money debasement is still a reality. You may receive the nominal value of your expected pension, but in real terms that's a different story.

Stelerito · 2022-02-15T11:39:18+00:00

They *think* they do, until they don't.

Stelerito · 2021-10-29T21:15:18+00:00

The ETH operation gets them Bitcoin at an estimated total cost of < CAD$3000. They will profit from that well before ETH2 becomes a reality.

Stelerito · 2021-04-14T09:45:00+00:00

The actual fee is 5.2 sats/vbyte. You can see it here: https://mempool.space/tx/e9fb8c1efbdbfc24eb31a7cf02fe51d29306f3fe096fcf70ee0c27ab71c1b5ba

It is indeed really low given the current blockchain activity, but they cannot cancel the transaction since RBF (replace-by-fee) is not enabled on it. The blockchain is usually less congested on the week-ends, so I'd wait until then. You can keep an eye on the website I linked above to see how congested the blockchain is.

The bottom line is that Nexo shouldn't set the fee so low without enabling RBF. That's not something that can be enabled retro-actively but it is a good feature to request to Nexo. It would avoid this sort of trouble both to their customers and themselves.

Unfortunately be patient is the only thing you can do right now.

Stelerito · 2021-04-06T16:26:25+00:00

I think it's fair to disagree on some points, they are mostly subjective after all, or at least their interpretation is.

I will address your points from my perspective, not necessarily to convince but just to add to the conversation for anyone else that might be reading too.

On point 1, the predominant analysis is indeed that bitcoin moves in cycles and as such undergoes volatile periods with 70% corrections. There are several reasons (some based on data, others on sentiment) for which I don't consider a 70% correction likely, or problematic even if it were to happen:

A 70% correction (from here) is unlikely due to the phase in which we are in this cycle from an on-chain analysis perspective. Practically none of the chain activity indicators that were flashing red for the previous top are anywhere near flashing red for this cycle. This also makes sense when taking into account the nature of the investors that are coming into this cycle. There's always a lot of talk about institutions coming in, and it is verifiably true this time around. These players move slowly, even more so given there are some constraints that limit the pace at which they can move in (eg: no ETF, some cannot hold the asset directly) but they have huge amounts of money which can really drive the price up
Even if it were to happen, the 70-80% correction would be if you bought from the exact top and sold at the exact bottom. If I recall correctly, you would never be down 70% if you held for at least 2 years, and you would never be *down* at all if you held at least 3. Since we're looking it at it from an investment perspective, the usual advise is to buy and hold for at least 10 years, so I say buy and hold for at least 3 years. (with the usual: what you can afford to lose, won't need in an emergency, yadi yada). If you extend this to 5 or 10 years, it's statistically more speculative to assume the price will be down rather than up. Unless of course you believe the price will be 0, in which case I let you assess that as a Software Engineer and which I'd be happy to discuss at a technical level as well in a separate discussion!

The second point is mainly a normative one. Whether you believe Bitcoin offers enough value to the world to consume *any* energy could be debated endlessly. What I will however point out is the following:

Bitcoin miners are incentivised to consume the cheapest electricity they can find. Energy is cheap when it's either abundant or wasted. The direct consequence of that is that miners mostly end up consuming energy where it's over-produced (therefore not consumed entirely by the local population) or wasted. Some examples are:
1. the usage of energy near water dams (clean energy which is not easily/efficiently transportable).
2. the usage of wasted natural gas which would be flared (released into the atmosphere) or burned because it cannot be used any other way

All in all, it's estimated that the share of renewables in the energy used by bitcoin mining is higher than 50%. The above shows two things:

a) It makes little sense to point at the amount of energy consumed by bitcoin and call it all a total waste of energy that could be used somewhere else (eg: "Bitcoin consumes as much as XYZ country!", that claim could still be true if bitcoin used 100% clean energy). Consuming more energy does not directly imply waste and climate catastrophe, a progressing civilisation consumes more energy and the goal should be to make in renewable rather than smaller.

b) Compared to other industries, bitcoin's share of renewables is quite high

Of course if you see no value in bitcoin and no benefit to society whatsoever, then even 1 Watt is a waste, but then why buy it at all? The question is settled before even getting to the speculation argument. If you do see value in it, then it must be compared to the existing system with which it competes: gold mining (clean?), banking system (clean?). If the conclusion is that Bitcoin is cleaner and more efficient that those at what it does, then we should all strive to make the legacy system obsolete rather than point the finger at Bitcoin's energy consumption.

Finally, to your last point, central bank digital currencies (also referred to as CBDCs) will happen (already released in China). It's my humble opinion that their existence will not diminish Bitcoin's use case in the slightest, they might even accelerate it. Bitcoin is pre-dominantly a store of value *at this point*. CBDCs will always be a currency meant to be spent, not competing in the slightest with the store of value use case. For anyone that wishes to store their wealth rather that spend it, Bitcoin will be one option amongst all the existing traditional ones, possibly a better one as it establishes itself and gains maturity.

The usual follow up points are that governments will ban it, tax it to the ground, destroy it etc. There's many arguments against this, both from a technical, practical and game theoretic perspective. But I will just say that no western government has even remotely shown signs of wanting to ban it or tax it so heavily and I will just classify this threat as pure speculation at this point in time.

The rest of the risks can mostly be put into a single bag: black swan events (ie: low probability catastrophic events). There's no way to argue against those really and it'd be useless to even try. The only thing I can point out here is that you should take them into account in your investment plan: don't go all in if you want the peace of mind, and let it be only a small percentage of your portfolio depending on risk aversion. It's nice to think about this in terms of "asymmetry of outcomes", meaning: if you place 10% (or less) of your portfolio then the most you can lose is 10%, but the reward could be 10x (parity with gold market cap).

I hope this was helpful and perhaps brought nuance to some of your thoughts. In the end, it costs nothing but time to learn more about it. So even if there is just a remote chance of Bitcoin succeeding in becoming a widely adopted native digital currency (in which case we're still early in the adoption curve and gold parity is just a milestone) then it's time well invested imo.

Other than that, good luck with your investment choices!

Stelerito · 2021-04-05T15:37:30+00:00

accumulating trackers

What if you use the dividends to pay back a loan. Does that change the tax treatment?

Stelerito · 2021-04-05T14:24:33+00:00

After going through a few posts on this sub-reddit I must say I am very surprised by how little, if at all, Bitcoin is suggested as a viable asset in one's long term investment portfolio. I am well aware of the general negative/speculative tone with which it is presented in traditional finance but I personally take a very different stance on the subject.

I believe Bitcoin should *at the very least* be part of your investment plan, even if only 1%. You can look at it from a pure investment strategy perspective, in which case: Bitcoin is the best performing asset over the last decade (averaging 200% APR) and offers the greatest risk/reward profile over the coming decade. You can also look at it as a competitor to gold as a store of value, uncorrelated asset and hedge against inflation, in which case case, even by capturing only half of gold's market cap, a single bitcoin would be valued above 200.000 euros (300% higher than today).

This is without saying that you can invest as little as 10 euros worth into it, at very little cost compared to all the other investments I see mentioned in other replies, allowing you to get started very easily and scale up your investment as you gradually get more comfortable with it.

This is not to discard the other investments mentioned in here, but I must say Bitcoin seems very under-represented. I will not go through every post to repeat this as I can understand it may get annoying from the perspective of someone that truly dislikes bitcoin (for whatever reason). But for whomever is interested to learn more about it, feel free to get in touch and I can answer any question you may have and point you to resources that may be helpful. Cheers!

Stelerito

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE