EternalUsenet
Joined 3 years ago
Joined 3 years ago
At any rate, one consideration folks don’t seem to have for the halvening is the reduction in rewards for miners.
As mining becomes more expensive and transaction fees increase exponentially, I see more and more smaller miners dropping out of the pool as it becomes too expensive for them to operate (and we are in a high interest rate environment, so capital for borrowing is much more expensive to acquire). Then the miners that are left start to concentrate and potentially cause a security concern. It becomes too top heavy.
I’m not sure why alarm bells aren’t going off for Bitcoiners?
Also, the halvening I imagine will be a very bad thing for miners, unless it’s guaranteed to double in price, miners are going to suddenly make less in value after the event occurs. Just because the halvening happened to behave a certain way in the past doesn’t guarantee future results.
This is really feeling like tragedy of the commons and needing to find more ways to pull in real money into this system so whales can swim in their piles.
I see this as a means to sucker more retail cash in and have the early adopters of Bitcoin hoover it up.
For the record, my statement as of right now is still true. Remember that Bitcoin peaked at nearly 69k a piece and it’s currently at around $42k a piece.
This is probably the media trying to get some bags pumped.
Probably should have left Coinbase in handcuffs, but I digress.
But in all seriousness, Coinbase is not a particularly ethical company. I still won’t forgive them for how they pulled off the insider trading and boosting of Litecoin, which made Charlie Lee rich off the backs of the peanut gallery.
EDIT: for those with seemingly limited memories - Charlie Lee worked for Coinbase at one point, and was able to successfully get his shitcoin (which was basically a hastily tweaked bitcoin) accepted for off ramping to fiat. Sounds like a direct conflict of interest, and I’m surprised Coinbase wasn’t investigated for this.