Hey, regarding the death spiral, don't forget, miners don't get paid based on share of total global hashing power. The get paid based on how much hashing power they contribute. If mining power drops by half, blocks will be found half as often, but the miners still mining will get twice what they used to, since remaining blocks will still be shared among remaining miners.
At the 7 minute mark I believe you’re wrong about what you’re saying (assuming I understood what you meant). As a miner in the network it makes absolutely no difference for me if every other miner leaves the network and I’m left as the only one. Assuming a stable price per Bitcoin. The network will be a lot slower but I’ll be generating the same amount of Bitcoin as before and being equally as profitable. There’s no death spiral or anything there. Also as the blocks are slower, less transactions get confirmed and fees go higher so I actually end up making more money if other miners leave. Besides that, the sell pressure of mined bitcoins goes down so it can even have an effect to push price per Bitcoin up. So, overall, a sudden heavy decrease of hash rate in the network is actually beneficial for the remaining miners even before the next difficulty retargeting.
Hey Andreas awesome vid!! Excited for the the new BTC changes coming. Have you looked into IP Exchange / IPSX? It's a peer to peer IP address rental / exchange. They are also getting into a lot of big data initiatives like storage etc. The business end of the platform is launched and they are working on the consumer to consumer end. They will also be establishing data center exchanges where they can rent a large volume of IP addresses. IP market is 80 billion dollars and grows 16% per year. IPSX is less than 1 million market cap.
Isn't the difficulty adjustment every 2016 blocks? Thereby the timing is what sets the adjustment. I.E. 2016 blocks in 6 days instead of the expected 7. 7/6 = difficulty adjustment. Diff. increased by 16.667% Of course the math probably uses seconds for the time. That's more cumbersome for a simple example.
9:25 what reason is there not to do difficulty retargeting every block? using a rolling 2w average or similar I don't see why you'd want to subject yourself to the current risk, even if you consider it a small risk.
I'm very confused now... Isn't the difficulty retargeted every 2016 blocks, independent of the time it took to get there? Or recently it became time checked, independantly of blocks count? (Pretty sure it is not the case)
Wouldn't changing Targeting algorithm be difficult in the sense that if coin value was dropping faster than difficulty change, ( which is what most likely proceeded difficulty change in first place ), which would result in remaining miners having more coin volume as you describe, but at end of day end up with less value than before in total? If we examine the current difficulty drop, which is HUGE, it still isn't enough additional adjustment of coin volume to end up with more profits at end of the day. In other words, it could keep perpetuating and you would be guessing where to make change to Target Algo, one after the other.
@anntonop Difficulty re-targeting looks at last 2016th block timestamp and then difference of that with current block timestamp will get into account, Not the other way around.
Actually it's how much time did it take to mine 2016 blocks and not how much blocks did we mine in 2 weeks! The difficulty is recalculated after 2016 blocks, not after exactly 2 weeks.
Miners mine against the difficulty, not against other miners. When hashpower is reduced individual miners (who didn't change the hashrate) will mine bitcoin at the same rate. Few.
Andreas- If Governments, state and or local were to "take over" mining, i would think consensus would be most likely a Hard-Fork and would do away with that. That would be centralizing in a very large way. That would go against everything that Bitcoin is? ( Get away from Government manipulation, etc ). A better solution is to have state/local governments help protect mining farms and to help them grow looking forward. A mutual cooperation between citizen mining operations and governments. Some kind of "Checks and Balances", or cooperative dependency.
on 12/03 and 12/04/2018 four whale wallets of 66k bitcoin, 2 whale wallets of 26k BTC and two of 30k BTC moved to 800 Segwit wallet addresses. A total of 378,000 bitcoin moved to 800 segwit vallets addresses. Who knows WHY?
It's too late now but I wish the initial inflation rate was ~50% less. Also wish the difficulty adjustment was faster to preserve the coinbase reward since difficulty has historically increased more than decreased. Also wish the block size could automatically increase/decrease in relation to the mempool and fees similar to how the difficulty adjustment works to maintain consistency. Donating coins to the coinbase would be cool to.
I talk about it more in this video: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-d4xXJh677J0.html Also, covered in Chapters 9 and 10 of 'Mastering Bitcoin': github.com/bitcoinbook/bitcoinbook/blob/f8b883dcd4e3d1b9adf40fed59b7e898fbd9241f/ch09.asciidoc github.com/bitcoinbook/bitcoinbook/blob/df1828b7205a5950a16a3182cf9b15421ee70658/ch10.asciidoc
@@NixonRexzile-xz4sq No! Channels are Channels. This Channels live on Nodes. And there are no new Bitcoin produced/mined. But you get some Fees when your Node propagate Payments.
