Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.223.175 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.223.175; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-ie0-f175.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAJqsvLCG2Cv=7wzDLotunEUTnAvdxVLSGrMEtkAnmdoBgONBsg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAE28kUS-uDbd_Br3H5BxwRm1PZFpOwLhcyyZT9b1_VfRaBC9jw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJHLa0PeB-DMs2zo680FRvaejV-K97k2g0Ti9pPdaNeH+gYmog@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAE28kUSPb3ZC1nJyX7H__7cAgXvOvPbZ+Tub+htGd5+tujZndg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJHLa0M20QjBOwhOwJWJUcPBLzmaX1uuPy-6ytvJQWLZy68aeg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAE28kUS7cr3i-pSew6Y+xvfLEY5D1mi4oHU-GXv+jEf-i_8sVQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABsx9T1RPkif1+DEsOLrFfr-sE=FCs_B5C5aZzKr6HZCHw15ag@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADfmNEk40DTHDB8if_y_2i_Omoszd_BgcSxf-oS+ZcQB0tZZhg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAS2fgSiz-XRVQ4V+KbrTUWG4=g=WGf8c-pF4b4fFnfyU9HOqQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAS2fgRjwg_XyvzHbMhmaiW85LmmsW3YiXHyhpKMHd2a03pH2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAE28kUSqqcsMJArK29nG+UCiTX9buiJbQoMb30-oH-G=eFxrnQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJqsvLCG2Cv=7wzDLotunEUTnAvdxVLSGrMEtkAnmdoBgONBsg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 21:43:42 +0000
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgR4-V10i2D=v5-ZR9rWYcBjPKyRgGvgnG3JAmPKr4x19Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?B?SsOpcsOpbWllIER1Ym9pcy1MYWNvc3Rl?= <jeremie.dl@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Fwd: death by halving
Precedence: list

On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 9:19 PM, J=C3=A9r=C3=A9mie Dubois-Lacoste
<jeremie.dl@gmail.com> wrote:
> The fact that a topic was brought up many times since a long time,
> does not mean it is not relevant.

I am not saying that it is "not relevant", I'm saying the discussion
is pointless:

No new information has arrived since the very first times that this
has been discussed except
that the first halving passed without incident.
If people were not sufficiently convinced that this was a serious
concern before there was concrete evidence (however small) that it was
okay, then discussion is not likely going to turn out differently the
50th or 100th time it is repeated...
except, perhaps, by wearing out all the most experienced and
knowledgeable among us as we become tired of rehashing the same
discussions over and over again.

On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 9:23 PM, Ferdinando M. Ametrano
<ferdinando.ametrano@gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
> As of now the cost per block is probably already about 100USD, probably i=
n
> the 50-150USD.

This is wildly at odds with reality. I don't mean to insult, but
please understand that every post you make here consumes the time of
dozens (or, hopefully, hundreds) of people. Every minute you spend
refining your post has a potential return of many minutes for the rest
of the users of the list.

At current difficulty, with a SP30 (one of the
leading-in-power-efficiency) marginal break-even is ~1144.8852 * $/kwh
=3D=3D $/btc.

At $0.10/kwh each block has an expected cost right now, discounting
all one time hardware costs, close to $3000.