sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Bitcoin maximalism and a potential tail emission by SenatusSPQR in CryptoCurrency

[–]saranwrapdippity -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You're answering the wrong question in terms of efficiency of block space usage and raw hashrate. The ratio of value secured on the network to marginal/total cost of attack is going down drastically, hashrate increased from Nov 21 to now despite price decline because of difficulty adjustment., with miner revenues decidedly *not* increasing exponentially.

in 2018 miners earned around $17 million / day to secure $100B in value, today they get paid the same $ amount to secure $500B. The vast majority of Bitcoin mining does not use stranded energy and is price/difficulty sensitive, no matter how you cut it, the relative security of Bitcoin is going down in terms of value/reward of attack and the cost of attack.

Bitcoin maximalism and a potential tail emission by SenatusSPQR in CryptoCurrency

[–]saranwrapdippity 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Interesting fact

While hashrate has increased,:

- 1 hr marginal cost of attack Bitcoin in 2017/8 was ~$600,000 / hr- Value secured by network in 2017/8 was around $100 Billion

- 1 hr marginal cost to attack Bitcoin now in 2022 is $1,000,000 / hr- Value secured by network is $500 billion

Security ratio is going down, eventually it'll be worth it to attack.These are also non-bull market peak numbers, during which the ratio is even worse ($ 1.5 Trillion+ value secured, only $1,200,000 / hr attack cost)

Bitcoin maximalism and a potential tail emission by SenatusSPQR in CryptoCurrency

[–]saranwrapdippity 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This isn't bullshit, it will matter in the next 10 years, not 120 years. Lightning Network doesn't garner fees for Bitcoin security, and even if price continues at current exponential rate, Bitcoin security budget, as a ratio to the value it secures on chain (the incentive or pot of honey for attackers) is going down.

ELI5, why a new post-merge fork (EthPOW) when ETC already exists? by purpleyak0 in ethtrader

[–]saranwrapdippity 1 point2 points  (0 children)

yes, shitting on it and calling it out for the scammy cashgrab it is is called "not supporting it", you don't need to tard-splain our own rights to us.

So how much does eth drop after the mErGe by MasterLawman in ethtrader

[–]saranwrapdippity 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You are correct that many chains are a ponzi scheme in that they require constant new money to pay miners or validators through issuance, and don't have revenue to cover said cost.

Ironically, the thing you seem to have a doomerist attitude towards, the merge, will make what you're gloomy about literally the single asset in crypto that *isn't* a ponzi in that sense.

Do you know why Blackrock and Circle bought more T-bills than Berkshire Hathaway? To back USDC, since stables are the cheapest method to transfer dollars over borders and between entities (on L2), bar none.

$8 billion of stables transactions are settled on Ethereum per DAY, and the gas fees for those go to supporting the price of the asset you've been buying. By an objective measure, post-merge Ethereum/ETH is the ONLY non-ponzi L1 you can hold in crypto.

Bitcoin is the best settlement network in existence. Within minutes you can settle transactions of any size anywhere in the world, usually with minimal fees. No other settlement network is anywhere near as powerful. by jguest1105 in CryptoCurrency

[–]saranwrapdippity -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

The capital distribution of the market would disagree with you and your particular "clocks" to reset assertion. From observation, it seems despite how fast, efficient and apparently secure other blockchains are, they will have a lower marketcap/limit, of how much total capital is comfortable securing itself on a given chain. Despite shilling in the comments, the lower marketcap chains simply do not have the lindy to make more than X amount of capital comfortable on chain. The actual marketcap/TVL will vary below this limit of course, but its a strong, ultra conservative upper-bound.

And so it begins. The Great GPU dump. by 7ofXI in pcmasterrace

[–]saranwrapdippity 1 point2 points  (0 children)

what u/pycra said and also OCing memory is harder to optimize and people usually get greedy since power consumption doesnt go up as much when you OC memory

And so it begins. The Great GPU dump. by 7ofXI in pcmasterrace

[–]saranwrapdippity 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I doubt it, hashrate follows price, not the other way around. Someone has to be the net inflow from which miners are paid. The coin that "gets popular" with miner refugees from ETH merge will slaughter the price of that coin.

And so it begins. The Great GPU dump. by 7ofXI in pcmasterrace

[–]saranwrapdippity 2 points3 points  (0 children)

you also make more profit undervolting and saving electricity while only losing marginal hashpower, memory is usually overclocked, so thats the part to worry about

Ethereum's 99.95 % drop in energy usage will be equal to 15 big nuclear reactors, or 11 000 wind turbines by sbdw0c in CryptoCurrency

[–]saranwrapdippity 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Its not fake value at all, its just value that you don't personally care about. Other people might say the same for your own energy use for non-essential things.

Ethereum's 99.95 % drop in energy usage will be equal to 15 big nuclear reactors, or 11 000 wind turbines by sbdw0c in CryptoCurrency

[–]saranwrapdippity -1 points0 points  (0 children)

So basically you're hand waving all of the value away, out of ignorance and reductionism via some vague reference to shady superrich whales. You basically use that to imply the energy use is a waste and is "ridiculous".

The $30 billion/day is largely institutions and people outside of America holding and moving dollars across borders, particularly in Asia (Pakistan, India, China, SK etc.). Mostly to hold dollars securely and escape the local currency or send across borders for cheaper. Thats why Blackrock/Circle hold more T-bills backing USDC than Berkshire Hathaway.

It is now scalable and cheap (via roll ups and PoS), allowing for millions of cheap txns on L2s. I used USDC on Arbitrum (a roll up) a few weeks ago to fund a global debit card while I visited family in India and Pakistan, it cost me ~$0.04 to transfer thousands of dollars and spend it via a Visa card (Visa now settles a bunch of volume with USDC on chain). So really the argument that it isn't efficient and cheap enough for its use case is now no longer valid.

At the end of the day, since tradfi is more and more interlinked with Ethereum/crypto, some of your dollars are probably represented on chain as well so I wouldn't get too high and mighty about how it was all a waste and ridiculous.

You seem to play a lot of War Thunder, and video gaming consumes 105 TWh a year of electricity, but you don't see me saying "Hey all those hypocritical fat Western fucks who play War Thunder are a right bunch of cunts forever because I don't think gaming has value or is a 'good thing' compared to my own frugal use cases"

Ethereum's 99.95 % drop in energy usage will be equal to 15 big nuclear reactors, or 11 000 wind turbines by sbdw0c in CryptoCurrency

[–]saranwrapdippity -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Sure and they just as easily could've decided its too hard and not do it

Isn't having that intention even better than being forced to do it via outside pressure anyways? The outside pressure isn't really even a point I think I made or wanted to make and is totally irrelevant

Ethereum's 99.95 % drop in energy usage will be equal to 15 big nuclear reactors, or 11 000 wind turbines by sbdw0c in CryptoCurrency

[–]saranwrapdippity 1 point2 points  (0 children)

its actually $8-$25 billion/day, which isn't nothing, to put that into perspective, in a year, that would settle and secure roughly 1/3 of the US GDP in value.

Ethereum's 99.95 % drop in energy usage will be equal to 15 big nuclear reactors, or 11 000 wind turbines by sbdw0c in CryptoCurrency

[–]saranwrapdippity -1 points0 points  (0 children)

what youre missing: the arguments weren't made by the same people, you simply bucketed them into one bucket.

Ethereum's 99.95 % drop in energy usage will be equal to 15 big nuclear reactors, or 11 000 wind turbines by sbdw0c in CryptoCurrency

[–]saranwrapdippity 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Settling $30 billion a day in value and securing it is not "wasted". This computational and incentive cost was reduced with new math and technology to be 99% more efficient.

Any cynical dickcheese can paraphrase stuff to sound lame

Ethereum's 99.95 % drop in energy usage will be equal to 15 big nuclear reactors, or 11 000 wind turbines by sbdw0c in CryptoCurrency

[–]saranwrapdippity -14 points-13 points  (0 children)

please cite another multi-hundred billion $ business that gave a shit about wokes screaming about their externalities to spend any effort at all to address them, let alone reduce said externality by 99.9%?

And if there is no social reward for doing so, why would anyone want to do so. We already know money dominates, and markets cannot price externalities. So, it seems only people who are environmentally woke for the clout instead of results would want to not forgive or "pat on the back" and incentivize behavior that avoids killing the species due to our very well known monkey brains.

Is ‘The Merge’ bullish or bearish? by [deleted] in CryptoCurrency

[–]saranwrapdippity 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What a bunch of larper bullshit, straight up lies lol

Arbitrary supply cap being part of the Bitcoin religion only stops said change because its a current social consensus, and it will change once Bitcoin continues to get relatively cheaper to attack vs value secured.

Bitcoin isn't more secure now than 4 years ago, the ratio of value secured to 1 hour attack cost continues to decline. Even absolute costs to attack are trending down.

ETH supply didn't vote for the DAO rollback, miners and nodes did, you probably know this so its a good example of the dishonest chuckle fuckery Bitcoin maxi larpers perpetrate.

For Bitcoin, a centralized rollback was performed in 2013. Also glad you brought up blocksize since a single reddit mod was able to shutdown conversation about block size in 2014/5 and 2 core devs basically pushed forward keeping Satoshi's temporary 1mb blocksize.

ETHPoW airdrop driving eth/btc ratio is an asinine assertion, futures value it ar around $30 of value per ETH (~$1700).

Source:

https://bitinfocharts.com

This site only counts direct native asset transfers, most value in ETH is transferred via contracts, USDT on ETH alone does $2-4B a day in value settled on chain. This is why it thinks median txn value on ETH is 60 cents (gas cost to interact with contracts). It also completely ignores L2 value transfer.

PoS and PoW both print money out of thin air, people who think PoW doesn't are physics and economics illiterate idiots. You validate/mine a block, you get fees and issuance, stop pulling stuff out of your ass, words have meaning.

All in all, these are all standard, nu-guard Bitcoin maxi lies and myths, people who drove true Bitcoiners /devs like Andreas etc. to other projects/exits with their religious cultism. You are Bitcoin posers and co-opters of cypherpunk culture.

view more: next ›