4 ms·
If a cryptocurrency becomes too big to fail, then it seems inevitable that nation-states and large corporations will mine it at a loss.
by qznc 9y ago
If a cryptocurrency becomes too big to fail, then it seems inevitable that nation-states and large corporations will mine it at a loss.
- russdpale 9y agoIf it is solar powered, I don't see how it will be mined at a loss? Power is the number one cost, and we have a free unlimited supply of it.
- jacobush 9y agoSounds like the paperclip machine.
- jeremyjh 9y agoTell us more about your solar power station that has no capital investment or operating cost.
- cryptonector 9y ago"opportunity cost"
- tylersmith 9y agoPoW wouldn't work if power was free or unlimited.
- tempay 9y agoIt would, just the hardware/admin/maintenance costs would dominate instead.
- canoebuilder 9y agoWhat interest does a government or large corporation have in cryptocurrency? This is why cryptos as currently implemented will always be fringe and used for the most part illicitly, because as soon they gain a wide enough currency the participants in the system will switch to a more efficient, i.e. centralized system. If enough people use them that a government or large corp would care, those "enough people" would form a new government or become the customers a new corp, that facilitates their transactions in a more efficient way. ...and a touch ironic that you seem to be pining for TBTF cryptos when Satoshi himself railed against the TBTF system.
- qznc 9y agoI guess the build chain for complex international products (cars, smartphones) spans multiple currencies. Maybe it becomes worthwhile for Samsung, Toyota or BMW to use Bitcoins instead. Now it makes sense for them to do some mining just to secure the blockchain. The primary goal would be security not profit. (I don't consider that scenario likely, just possible)
- canoebuilder 9y agoI see the reasoning, especially from one steeped in the coinosphere, but this one seems best classed as very unlikely. Currency exchange is a solved problem with costs and overhead that is very likely much less than going into the "securing the blockchain" business, even as a side gig. How much "securing" would they need to do anyway? Just a little to help them sleep at night? Not to pick on you particularly, but in general there is so much mushiness and hand waving in the coin space about what exactly is the value proposition other than to the person selling you the coin at a profit.