The DOWNFALL of bitcoin

[bartosimpsonio]

Nice catchy title. Clicked immediately.

Interesting arguments.

10/10 great clickbait thread. Approved.

 

[KaleidoJack]

This is a complex issue. Recommended reading:

https://www.coindesk.com/the-last-word-on-bitcoins-energy-consumption

Basically, BTC's massive energy consumption isn't that big of a problem. There's lots of underused power and energy infrastructure to repurpose. We have now found a way to use all this energy with BTC, instead of letting it go to waste. Not all energy is equally hard on the environment, either. Finally, who are we to tell the miners where to use the energy they buy?

 

[KaleidoJack]

Though I do see the "next bitcoin" improving on this (PoS appears to use energy more efficiently than PoW, for example, and even better tech could be dreamt-up in the next years), this is not big enough of a deal right now to halt BTC's incoming general adoption.

Really. It's like we've built an airplane for the first time and people are complaining because it needs gas. Dude, how much energy does it cost to send rockets to Mars? Technological progress is supposed to be costly. For better or worse, the move to crypto assets will start with bitcoin (see: hashrates).

I should start a thread sharing all my thoughts on bitcoin.

 

[AmberJones]

nah bro its the future

 

[gihanzami]

Bitcoin is going to zero! zero! zero!



jk

 

[Kambaggo]

Perhaps it would be a good idea to stop future halvings.

In that case all remaining bitcoins can be mined faster which would be good as I guess that there is no need for bitcoin mining anymore when everything has been mined.

No mining, no energy needed. The only energy needed would be for transaction confirmations which is a lot less than mining.

Or is this a stupid idea?

 

[alus1onZ]

This and some other things about BTC will force me to cash out almost all of my BTC in 2025 (shortly after the next halving). I just don't believe BTC will be sustainable to be maintained after that.

 

[xStewie]

Yup, dying forever......

 

[blockhot21]

What about quantum computing? Looks like China is on track to achieve this.

I'm also concerned about this issue ; this is the only thing that si preventing me from buying any kind of current cryptos, which are not quantumproof as far as I know... any thoughts?

 

[msyaz]

If you want to make fast profits out of Bitcoin, yeah sure it might work. Keyword = might

Is it a reliable store of value?

Absolutely no.

 

[Bonpensiero]

I gotta tell you guys that the blockchain / crypto currency will probably be the future currency not particularly bitcoin though. Even if it is so "inefficient", "slow" , "energy demandable" etc.. at the moment.

Just remember the first computers:


This is a picture from 1957, a computer gets delivered. Keep also in mind that this big ass computer probably had not more than 2MB of total memory!!

Now I'm pretty sure that when some people who built these things or at least saw the opportunity of computers back in the day, told the regular folk that one day every household will have one computer, the regular people would probably laugh and tell how useless and inconvenient that would be.

A few years later ... Nowadays everyone carries a small computer inside of his pocket that is 1000 times more powerful and efficient than the first computers which not only very slow and inefficient but also cost a fortune.

 

[ruyiotr]

I now check coinmarketcap at least 20 times a day, this thread can't even shake the faith I have in Bitcoins

 

[KaleidoJack]

@Bonpensiero

lol. I deleted my post so I could then compile all my thoughts into a thread, not so you could post the exact same examples and analogies.

whatever. you could have written it better, but the point is still valid.

 

[Deleted member 923340]

I don't see anyone giving a logical counter argument to OP in this thread or any thread someone brings logic into why bitcoin wouldn't last. Why get so emotional peeps?

The thing i find really interesting is that - you are all attacking the same way relegious nuts attack when someone brings logic.

Crazy how humans have this desire to be part of a cult.

I've got some money in btc too.. I see it as an opportunity to make some quick cash. That's all.

 

[KaleidoJack]

Is it a reliable store of value?

Absolutely no.

Of course it isn't... now. But that's not how sound investing works. We want to invest in the Amazons and the Apples BEFORE they absolutely dominate the markets, not when one of their shares costs 500 bucks! So what we are saying is that it looks like BTC will be a great asset for institutions with loads of cash to store their wealth. That's all we're saying. We're looking into the future. All it takes is for its volatility to decrease, and this should gradually happen as its market cap reaches 10 trillions.

This is not financial advice. It's just good sci-fi logic.

 

[DamoHG]

"We'd have to double our global energy production," he says with a laugh. "For Bitcoin."

I presume that is based off todays value/hardware and is not taking into account

1) Havenings
2) Hardware getting better over time

 

[KaleidoJack]

I don't see anyone giving a logical counter argument to OP in this thread or any thread someone brings logic into why bitcoin wouldn't last. Why get so emotional peeps?

The thing i find really interesting is that - you are all attacking the same way relegious nuts attack when someone brings logic.

Crazy how humans have this desire to be part of a cult.

I've got some money in btc too.. I see it as an opportunity to make some quick cash. That's all.

Read my first post here:

This is a complex issue. Recommended reading:

https://www.coindesk.com/the-last-word-on-bitcoins-energy-consumption

Basically, BTC's massive energy consumption isn't that big of a problem. There's lots of underused power and energy infrastructure to repurpose. We have now found a way to use all this energy with BTC, instead of letting it go to waste. Not all energy is equally hard on the environment, either. Finally, who are we to tell the miners where to use the energy they buy?

 

[Dark Sky]

An increase in the number of miners doesn't increase tx throughput.

Miners dedicate compute power to solving each block, that's it. Once the block is solved, an amount of txs up to the limit of each block are added to the current block and added to the chain.

Every ~10 mins a block is mined, more miners doesn't speed that up (long term). More compute power does solve blocks faster because the problem space of all solutions is searched faster with higher hashes, but the BTC blockchain detects reductions in block solution time and then adjusts the difficulty parameter in in order to bring it back in line with ~10 mins solution times. It does this by removing a 0 from the target hash.. expanding the problem space significantly, and making it harder for the newly increased amount of hash power to be able to search as effectively as it did before the difficulty adjustment.



Also, regarding the idea that BTC uses too much power, no one gives a shit. People were talking about this years ago, since then the price of Bitcoin is xx,xxx% more and it's been integrated into mainstream finance since then, as well as being used by 20X more people today than it was then.

It's a mute point. Yes, Bitcoin is not environmentally friendly. No, that won't impact its usage or value, or in any way slow its growth. Over time further ways to greenify Bitcoin mining will be brought into play, until then the only people that ever care about this point are salty people looking for a drawback amongst a sea of benefits (no offence OP, not directed at you specifically).

I get your perspective but listen 1 million active bitcoin wallets at the moment.

There is 124 million households with bank accounts in america.

We are no where near the amount of people that could adopt bitcoin as a currency, and yet it's using more electricity than the netherlends, and entire country.

And that's just America, imagine if it was globally adopted.

Now you say miners could go green, If I'm correct, the energy companies cannot keep up at the pace bitcoin is being adopted? They can't just build tons more of renewable stations in line with the rapid increase of bitcoin, because then if bitcoin crashes, they have wasted a lot of money. That would be energy companies assuming the risk of bitcoin. They probably don't want to touch any risk to do with bitcoin, so they will increase production slowly with no risk,

I see all the benefits, and I would love it to be adopted. I really would. I'm a techy and my whole life is swarmed by tech. I even work full time as an IT engineer. I love tech. But since anyone and everyone can be a bitcoin miner, I'm not sure there is a solution to the dirty energy increase that's happening.

Governments are struggling as it is to be greener, I doubt that people as a collective have a shot at making bitcoin green.

As David Attenborough says, we haven't got much time left to sort this environmental issue. And the bitcoin energy issue is a whopping problem that's going to need a massive solution. And if it doesn't get one soon, I have a feeling governments will step in, purely to protect their own currencies, but they will use the environmental angle as it's firepower.

I mean doubling global energy production which is renewable? They are struggling to make the current global production renewable. Not sure how you expect them to double the planets power with only renewable energy?

"We'd have to double our global energy production," he says with a laugh. "For Bitcoin."

I presume that is based off todays value/hardware and is not taking into account

1) Havenings
2) Hardware getting better over time

Erm, it is, but technology increases according to moores law, and requires silver. I don't think hardware increases as fast as you think it does. There is a limitation on standard computing, which we are getting very close too. That's why Microsoft and google are investing in quantum computers. Quantum computers removed the physical limitation.

 

[kokosko]

They coming for Crypto.

View attachment 164753

LMAO - going to steal this for every "Bitcoin is Dying" Thread !

 

[Deleted member 1333509]

I get your perspective but listen 1 million active bitcoin wallets at the moment.

There is 124 million households with bank accounts in america.

We are no where near the amount of people that could adopt bitcoin as a currency, and yet it's using more electricity than the netherlends, and entire country.

And that's just America, imagine if it was globally adopted.

Now you say miners could go green, If I'm correct, the energy companies cannot keep up at the pace bitcoin is being adopted? They can't just build tons more of renewable stations in line with the rapid increase of bitcoin, because then if bitcoin crashes, they have wasted a lot of money. That would be energy companies assuming the risk of bitcoin. They probably don't want to touch any risk to do with bitcoin, so they will increase production slowly with no risk,

I see all the benefits, and I would love it to be adopted. I really would. I'm a techy and my whole life is swarmed by tech. I even work full time as an IT engineer. I love tech. But since anyone and everyone can be a bitcoin miner, I'm not sure there is a solution to the dirty energy increase that's happening.

Governments are struggling as it is to be greener, I doubt that people as a collective have a shot at making bitcoin green.

As David Attenborough says, we haven't got much time left to sort this environmental issue. And the bitcoin energy issue is a whopping problem that's going to need a massive solution. And if it doesn't get one soon, I have a feeling governments will step in, purely to protect their own currencies, but they will use the environmental angle as it's firepower.

I mean doubling global energy production which is renewable? They are struggling to make the current global production renewable. Not sure how you expect them to double the planets power with only renewable energy?



Erm, it is, but technology increases according to moores law, and requires silver. I don't think hardware increases as fast as you think it does. There is a limitation on standard computing, which we are getting very close too. That's why Microsoft and google are investing in quantum computers. Quantum computers removed the physical limitation.

Was going to write a big reply, but realised that I can't be bothered mate.

I'm sure there's other people here that find talking about Bitcoin's energy consumption interesting, but I'm not one of them. If the answer to the question "will it change anything?" is no, then I'm not really too worried about it.

Plenty of industries use excessive amounts of energy, water, natural resources, produce huge amounts of carbon, take up huge amounts of arable land. None of those industries challenge the financial status quo though, and so their excesses are largely ignored while Bitcoin's energy use is a big topic we should all discuss.

Is it a problem that Bitcoin uses so much energy, yes.

Do the benefits of decentralized currency vastly outweigh that single drawback, yes of course.

Is there any industry that is more proactive about finding innovative ways to solve problems like this as the tech sector, no.

Are there more important things to focus on with regards to Bitcoin and crypto, sure, this is probably not even in the top 50 important crypto topics to discuss.