5 ms·

> When bitcoin gets more efficient or energy cheaper, the amount of bicoin "work" done stays constant... Not quite. The extra work it does allows the network t

> When bitcoin gets more efficient or energy cheaper, the amount of bicoin "work" done stays constant... Not quite. The extra work it does allows the network to secure itself better. We don't have to agree with this energy use, but it does do something.

paulgb 6y ago
Do you believe the Bitcoin network would be insufficiently secure if miners were incentivized only by the transaction fees and not the block rewards?
- xiphias2 6y ago
  Bitcoin has to withstand an attack from central banks of the world in the future. Just look at some comments from Christine Legarde to see what is coming. It's the war of media companies vs internet coming back, just with something much more important. I hope Bitcoin wins, but I think that nobody knows the future for certain.
  - SCLeo 6y ago
    Other cryptocurrencies? Maybe, I am not an expert on them. But definitely not bitcoin. Its transaction speed is simply way too slow. And it is not even close.
    - xiphias2 6y ago
      Most cryptocurrencies are a joke, trivial to attack by any state, or even somebody renting machines on AWS
  - logifail 6y ago
    > Bitcoin has to withstand an attack from central banks of the world in the future Q: How do we imagine central banks would 'attack' a cryptocurrency, and how is a cryptocurrency (or its users/owners/proponents) going to defend against whatever form such attacks might take?
    - xiphias2 6y ago
      Buy / bribe miners to have a constant 50% attack even if they lose billions / tens of billions of dollars. Bitcoin mining should soon be seen as national security threat for countries that have the most bitcoins, that's why having so much hashing power in China is dangerous.
      - logifail 6y ago
        > Buy / bribe miners to have a constant 50% attack even if they lose billions / tens of billions of dollars (This is a genuine question, I'm not nearly as well-read on this as I should be) What would this achieve, and whom would benefit? My naïve assumption would be that coordinated, deliberate (over-)regulating of cryptocurrencies and/or attempting to manipulate prices lower might be a) much cheaper, and b) much more effective. If you bring enough political pressure to bear on any particular international financial flow, it takes quite a lot of (political!) effort to stand up to that. Look at what happened between the US and Iran re: the reintroduction of sanctions; then look at the response from France, the United Kingdom, and Germany.[0][1] Can Bitcoin and its backers (yet?) muster sufficient political muscle to respond if there's a coordinated political attack? [0] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference=EPRS_ATA(2018)630273 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?re... [1] https://ecfr.eu/article/commentary_trading_with_iran_special_purpose_vehicle_how_it_can_work/ https://ecfr.eu/article/commentary_trading_with_iran_special...
        xiphias2 6y ago
        It's easy to censor Iran if you control the international clearing system. What you suggest is more similar to banning gold, which happened 100 years ago in US. Where do you think gold price went after that?
        logifail 6y ago
        > What you suggest is more similar to banning gold, which happened 100 years ago in US. Where do you think gold price went after that? Where the gold price when after 1933 isn't that relevant to all those who were forced to sell their gold to the Federal Reserve at that time.[0] Thought experiment: were your national government to pass a law forcing you to sell your Bitcoin to them at a price they pick, you would appear to have precisely two options: 1) sell, or 2) be prosecuted There's plenty of precedent for 2) [1], so I'm guessing most people would end up opting to sell. That would appear to be the end of that... (?) For clarity: no, I don't think this is right. It might happen anyway. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102 [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102#Prosecutions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102#Prosecuti...

paulgb 6y ago

Do you believe the Bitcoin network would be insufficiently secure if miners were incentivized only by the transaction fees and not the block rewards?

xiphias2 6y ago
Bitcoin has to withstand an attack from central banks of the world in the future. Just look at some comments from Christine Legarde to see what is coming. It's the war of media companies vs internet coming back, just with something much more important. I hope Bitcoin wins, but I think that nobody knows the future for certain.
- SCLeo 6y ago
  Other cryptocurrencies? Maybe, I am not an expert on them. But definitely not bitcoin. Its transaction speed is simply way too slow. And it is not even close.
  - xiphias2 6y ago
    Most cryptocurrencies are a joke, trivial to attack by any state, or even somebody renting machines on AWS
- logifail 6y ago
  > Bitcoin has to withstand an attack from central banks of the world in the future Q: How do we imagine central banks would 'attack' a cryptocurrency, and how is a cryptocurrency (or its users/owners/proponents) going to defend against whatever form such attacks might take?
  - xiphias2 6y ago
    Buy / bribe miners to have a constant 50% attack even if they lose billions / tens of billions of dollars. Bitcoin mining should soon be seen as national security threat for countries that have the most bitcoins, that's why having so much hashing power in China is dangerous.
    - logifail 6y ago
      > Buy / bribe miners to have a constant 50% attack even if they lose billions / tens of billions of dollars (This is a genuine question, I'm not nearly as well-read on this as I should be) What would this achieve, and whom would benefit? My naïve assumption would be that coordinated, deliberate (over-)regulating of cryptocurrencies and/or attempting to manipulate prices lower might be a) much cheaper, and b) much more effective. If you bring enough political pressure to bear on any particular international financial flow, it takes quite a lot of (political!) effort to stand up to that. Look at what happened between the US and Iran re: the reintroduction of sanctions; then look at the response from France, the United Kingdom, and Germany.[0][1] Can Bitcoin and its backers (yet?) muster sufficient political muscle to respond if there's a coordinated political attack? [0] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference=EPRS_ATA(2018)630273 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?re... [1] https://ecfr.eu/article/commentary_trading_with_iran_special_purpose_vehicle_how_it_can_work/ https://ecfr.eu/article/commentary_trading_with_iran_special...
      - xiphias2 6y ago
        It's easy to censor Iran if you control the international clearing system. What you suggest is more similar to banning gold, which happened 100 years ago in US. Where do you think gold price went after that?
        logifail 6y ago
        > What you suggest is more similar to banning gold, which happened 100 years ago in US. Where do you think gold price went after that? Where the gold price when after 1933 isn't that relevant to all those who were forced to sell their gold to the Federal Reserve at that time.[0] Thought experiment: were your national government to pass a law forcing you to sell your Bitcoin to them at a price they pick, you would appear to have precisely two options: 1) sell, or 2) be prosecuted There's plenty of precedent for 2) [1], so I'm guessing most people would end up opting to sell. That would appear to be the end of that... (?) For clarity: no, I don't think this is right. It might happen anyway. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102 [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102#Prosecutions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102#Prosecuti...