Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Bitcoin is vulernable to government manipulatio (Score 1) 396

"The relative value of a bit coin will always rely on demand, if people want to use them and have to compete for them on the market then the value goes up, if not it goes down."

Yes, and once that supply and demand had determined the price of Bitcoin, then you know how much will miners tend to spend on electricity, and so you also know how much new investments are need for the price to stay the same.

Comment Re:Bitcoin is vulernable to government manipulatio (Score 2) 396

Fresh investments are needed because Bitcoin mining network as a whole, has a real world bills to pay. That money has to come from somewhere.

If a miner decides not to sell fresh Bitcoins, it is the same as if he himself invested his cash into Bitcoins. So, new cash has to come from somewhere, and miners have a strong reason to sell. So, it's close to $3.6 million daily fresh cash, or the price of Bitcoins goes down.

The mysterious thing is why this fact that the Bitcoin price on the exchanges causes the total electricity cost of the network to follow it, is not wildly known.

Comment Re:Bitcoin is vulernable to government manipulatio (Score 4, Insightful) 396

Yes it does. Bitcoin needs up to 3.6 million dollars of fresh new suckers daily, for the price of Bitcoin to remain the same. Why is this so? Because miners have real costs that have to be paid in non-Bitcoin currencies, so they have to sell some on the exchanges.

Why 3.6 million, or perhaps a large chunk of that? Because, mining is basically a perfect competition situation, nobody can stop new miners from joining, and new miners will stop coming only when the cost of one Bitcoin more than the price on the exchange. This guarantees that mining will be a low profit business, and most of the value will be lost to electricity.

Who pays for that (large chunk) of 3.6 million daily? New suckers.

Comment Re:Definitions (Score 1) 182

It's promising in the first 25 minutes but then he wedges in "remote viewing" as a fact, and then it all falls apart.

Nothing later explains the world better, no predictions from his model where he puts consciousness into single atoms and similar bullshit.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Money is the root of all money." -- the moving finger

Working...