3 ms·
There would definitely be a first mover advantage. On the other hand, for most other VLSI applications, improved energy usage is a PERMANENT advantage: If e.g.
by microtherion 9y ago
There would definitely be a first mover advantage. On the other hand, for most other VLSI applications, improved energy usage is a PERMANENT advantage: If e.g. Apple improves energy efficiency of Annn chips, it enables them to build better devices, even if the rest of the industry catches up.
For Bitcoin, my understanding is that this is not the case, because any cost improvement in the industry will attract more miners until difficulty adjusts to the previous equilibrium where (cost of mining a bitcoin) = (value of a bitcoin)-(some risk premium)
- bigiain 9y agoYeah - that "first mover advantage" can be lucrative though. Simplistically they're betting on: (cost to you of mining a bitcoin)-(cost to everybody else of mining a bitcoin) * (time it takes to reach equilibrium) being a very big number...
- monob 9y agoIt's first mover advantage in the same way surviving is a first mover advantage. You're fine if you're profitable, but with constant improvements that won't be the case for long, unless you too start moving to new technology.