4 ms·
Your pollution non-argument It's completely irrelevant. I never mentioned pollution anyway. They could get the energy from clean fusion reactors or magic unicor
by noxer 6y ago
Your pollution non-argument It's completely irrelevant. I never mentioned pollution anyway. They could get the energy from clean fusion reactors or magic unicorn generators. Someone still has to pay for it. The hobbyist would collectively need to pay millions per day just for the energy. Even today with probably around 100 Million Bitcoin owners that would lead to several dollars per person per day. That half the Netflix user base paying their monthly subscription every day. Do you seriously thing people will do that? For a funny alternative money hobby thing. It's absurd. Its entirely running on its own printed bitcoins which slowly fade to zero block reward.
- vmception 6y agookay I misunderstood, whats the problem with people paying millions of dollars for something they want to do to the person providing power?
- noxer 6y agoThere is no problem. It's just highly unrealistic that such people can be found. And if they cant be found the end result is quite clear. Hashrate will drop to the point where attacks are possible and will occur. Or more likely non-profitable miners will do the final double spend scam before turning their hardware off. Or they go bankrupt and someone buys the hardware cheap to do the double spend after the difficultly adjusted. Either way BTC can not become the ham radio niche thing. Its endless growth or fatal failure.