Should bitcoin have tail emission?

they wont just work for free, they'll work for a loss. the only way to ensure that you can transact your bitcoin is by mining it. Big governments and sovereigns wont care about mining costs.

news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43902802
petertodd.org/2022/surprisingly-tail-emission-is-not-inflationary

a massive panic sell will lead to tons of miners becoming unprofitable and shutting down

the problem is the fact bitcoin has to go up to insane price levels to sustain security when the block reward is too low

so its not simple about a price crash causing miners to shut down, its the price being nowhere near the level it needs to be

The market-cap of bitcoin needs to be like a quadrillion dollars in 20 years time

So either Bitcoin was invented by a time traveler from the future has predicted hyperinflation or its dead in the water and needs to be Forked

I think it's honestly the only way forward.

yes muh fees but that is volatile and you don't want volatility in security incentives, plus it creates all kinds of extra mev bs

Big governments and sovereigns wont care about mining costs.

lmao, what do you think, governments are just going to spend quadrillions of dollars of energy to maintain bitcoins blockchain? at the cost of the tax payer?

Some of you fags are actually delusional

fair enough, best of luck to you with your shitcoin fork

i dont care, its going to happen, but it has to happen by the 2040s at the latest

still got a few more cycles where it will be okay with the OG btc to build wealth with before the new fork wars start again

It obviously is inflationary, maybe if you keep it insignificant it's outweighed by some deflationary mechanisms but then you have to ask yourself if their is really a point in insignificant implementation. Seems like a have your cake and eat it too moment

the problem is the fact bitcoin has to go up to insane price levels to sustain security when the block reward is too low

Yes. Double every 4 years to match halvings.

so its not simple about a price crash causing miners to shut down, its the price being nowhere near the level it needs to be

Yes but the last straw will be BTC price dropping in a time when block rewards are barely enough for even the most optimized miners. There will be attackers waiting for the optimal moment and low BTC price will cause hashrate to drop. This is the last few months before the attack, during the last years halvings will have done most of the "work".

The market-cap of bitcoin needs to be like a quadrillion dollars in 20 years time

Current MC * 2^(20 years / 4 years per halving)
$2T * 2^5 = $64 trillion to have same security budget. But chain TVL divided by security budget will be 32x lower, like it is after every halving by exactly 50%.

So either Bitcoin was invented by a time traveler from the future has predicted hyperinflation or its dead in the water and needs to be Forked

If fiat money hyperinflates, mining operating costs will inflate too. Inflating money can't save Bitcoin. Infinite and free energy would, so let's hope the time traveler predicted that.

20 years

BTC will unironically take at least 120 years to reach its hard cap.

at the cost of the tax payer?

They spend that money in way shittier things, lmao.

Marathon digital are building batteries for solar panels that mine bitcoin with 100% free energy so yes everyone will be mining for free in the not too distant future.

mathsanon destroys fudanon with facts and logic

based

I agree with him and I only added/clarified his points.

In three years, AI will spew out 1000 coins that have better branding and tech than Bitcoin per second. All of current crypto is based on the assumption that good software is hard and expensive to make. Anything that doesn't change fundamentally multiple times a day will be left behind, leading to a situation of extreme volatility. I don't think crypto will survive this.

They do have an answer to this, the answer is calling you a retard

The absolutely deflationary nature of Bitcoin is a feature not a bug
Also, you think satoshi or any of the various giga brains after him did not anticipate something as simple as a tail emission?

It is well within the game theory that large entities would seek to protect the chain as is done today with the amount of energy invested in protecting the hardness of our money with war

They don't have an answer because you have a problem. If miners can't make money they drop out, the difficulty lowers, the remaining miners make more money, incentivising new miners, while also incentivising energy efficiency. It's a self-correcting system.

What's surprising is how many people actually fall for these transparent attempts by institutional money to capture control of bitcoin.

cryptofags discover supply and demand

Miners get subsidized by deficit spending inflating the value away from every other bitcoin holder. Fix the massive oversupply of transaction capacity and the fees will go up. Bitcoin as money has failed, so you don't need a block every 10 minutes.

Ultra sound money narrative will turn to dust when changes are made to something so fundamental

for monero it doesn't work because its cpu only and they can't mine profitably with the constantly increasing difficulty. btc might be able to pull it off since there are no mining restrictions

You can GPU mine XMR. XMR is working just fine, nothing needs to be changed. Price is stable and it's actually being used unlike every other coin.

yeah you technically can but it will be with a lower hashrate than with a decade old cpu. the only realistic way to profit of it is if you somehow get free electricity or can get a botnet

No you idiot
1) Everyone on board with Bitcoin did so on the premise of a fixed supply. If they wanted tail emission they'd move to your shitcoin. They haven't and won't, so don't want tail emission.

2) Tail emission doesn't solve security on it's own. A fixed amount released into an increasing supply (or sold into fixed/growing) liquidity pools is going to decrease the amount miners are making from tail emission over time. Either way they'll need a fee market in the end.

3) Bitcoin is becoming a national security issue. The US, China., etc, will continue to grow mining infrastructure, even at a loss, just to prevent other countries from gaining control. Bitcoin mining is a new form of warfare and the state has no problem pissing away infinity dollars on warfare.

4) Mining is being subsidized as a way to grow electrical infrastructure and stabilize power grids. Much of North Africa & the Arabian peninsula was useless, too remote and resource-poor to build anything worthwhile. Same with a lot of oil & gas fields where there isn't enough transport infrastructure for natural gas so it just gets flared off. But now you can set up a solar farm or natural gas plant in the middle of nowhere, power miners with it, and grow an economy without connecting to external infrastructure. So power costs will continue to be subsidized or go down.

Yes, read Softwar. Figure out why every government is talking about Bitcoin. And it isn't just because of "number go up".

you still have to cover the depreciation cost of the ASIC miners, which is like the main cost.
Even in satoshi's time when you had CPU mining, the main cost was seen as the depreciation cost of leaving your computer running, rather than the power cost.
Besides, mining can't be completely free or the cost of a 51% attack would be completely free too.
The point of mining is to prevent a 51% attack. If you have fewer miners, then the difficulty is lower and it is it is cheaper to do a 51% attack. That is the problem
monero doesn't need to mine profitably, it is mined by botnets and random users at a loss already. the entry cost is nothing, you don't have to pay off the investment of an ASIC.
2) tail emission doesn't solve everything about security, but it does prevent this one issue that will otherwise kill security, which is shrinking miner payouts.
3) you are throwing around terms like "national security" and "infrastructure" and waving your hands without proposing any real strategy here. Specifically, how does it benefit the US (or any country) to subsidize faithful miners at a loss using taxpayer dollars?
4) it sounds like socializing the costs and privatizing the profits. What you're proposing is basically a wealth transfer from the taxpayer to the crypto industry. Also this idea that you just start building solar panels and all this power infrastructure in the middle of nowhere to start out, and use miners to pay for it isn't going to pan out if the MINING COSTS KEEP GETTING CUT IN HALF. So which is it? You are alternating in between a world in which mining pays for itself (it won't) and a world in which mining doesn't pay for itself so taxpayers will throw free money at it (they won't).

It's just a mishmash of unrelated nice-sounding things you've heard from bitcoin influencers without any overarching understanding of strategy or the way the world actually works.

(((peter todd)))

It looks like this could result in miners losing their hats and a 51% attack.

Like that's just fake and gay. 51%.... of what? It'll be a billion trillion times larger in 20 years, so who gives a shit? Hashpower could drop 99% over time and no one would give a fuck. The network wasn't vulnerable in 2020 or 2015, it's not vulnerable now

Everyone on board with Bitcoin did so on the premise of a fixed supply

fools

Tail emission doesn't solve security on it's own

tail emission should be a big enough amount for mining to stay profitable, as soon as mining drops a lot - gg, unused rigs will sit there waiting to 51%

Bitcoin is becoming a national security issue

Bitcoin mining is a new form of warfare

wat
bitcoin is illegal to trade in china, they mine as a weird way to sell electricity for dollars

Mining is being subsidized as a way to grow electrical infrastructure and stabilize power grids

???

This is such an obvious attack on bitcoin and this hbo faketoshi retard is an obvious glowie plant
OP is going to spam this thread til the end of time now.

they mine as a weird way to sell electricity for dollars

>Mining is being subsidized as a way to grow electrical infrastructure and stabilize power grids

???

"they mine as a way to sell electricity for dollars"

subsidies are government incentives, if everything is paid for by the people who buy bitcoins, it's not a subsidy, it's a usual business

we can go over that in 2069, until then there is enough block reward to keep it secure

You sure? The block reward for the 2032 halving will be less than a whole corn...

Fee market for transactions. Already exists. Already works.

The last five blocks have had median fees of around 0.04 BTC. That's almost $4,000. If BTC does a 10X (which would put it around the same market cap as gold) these fees would be more like $40,000.

100% agreed its a ticking timebomb, wont be soon but EVENTUALLY (maybe 3 more halvenings) miners will pack up and that risks security.

i have a feeling they'll have to hardfork but likely just to increase block size every 4 years as well (so transaction fees can fill abit more of the security budget)

By then, it will be over a million per. I'm sure the miners will survive.