1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <ferdinando@ametrano.net>) id 1XjEFU-0005Gl-Ft
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 28 Oct 2014 21:24:16 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from mail-la0-f48.google.com ([209.85.215.48])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1XjEFS-00054E-TT
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 28 Oct 2014 21:24:16 +0000
Received: by mail-la0-f48.google.com with SMTP id gq15so1408725lab.7
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Tue, 28 Oct 2014 14:24:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from
:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type;
bh=Mgfb+hrqN8Jq2V0yPOM5JtIwSb9NGxqU5QUh616sNb0=;
b=g2eLVEvQTFfelgHv2b9vtNpVVm1MrMdlyb8usZXZw82m8grMRgYGiwA/QwififQXAd
F7jVBeXctKBEHPGwQW8GvjBkFXrZjsVKUDmG4GXGsNB89g6KeHapm19SF/qMllkz2VN8
iz2acWFQyoEMqF84pAG3jJwVyhMz9isHUGFr+InIezftr2tEiLLlOXdoB1uAfKINWY7D
Y6urlKXkHoZMQaiGkOFStds/RN1cODkqtWTzdOdwyXqijttQG1DJGLtnEREGLjrobRX5
UHVbdtgEylNYQKB+w8n6q8YYcgYNaWPyTNx6orAIXvqt9fYi6+j2k79YCFsoGtxrS3KI
bQtg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmMcbn3Fqhw4Vp91V7mxU4+gHs7ydUvk2bRQpTdzspmWdQFoCLENigjFfDgu+Y5j33wOoON
X-Received: by 10.112.173.100 with SMTP id bj4mr6989990lbc.78.1414531447664;
Tue, 28 Oct 2014 14:24:07 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: ferdinando@ametrano.net
Received: by 10.25.15.158 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 14:23:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [79.11.148.196]
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgRjwg_XyvzHbMhmaiW85LmmsW3YiXHyhpKMHd2a03pH2Q@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>
From: "Ferdinando M. Ametrano" <ferdinando.ametrano@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 22:23:27 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: zwrkyh1mUc_ch-uw6OuKry9g4fQ
Message-ID: <CADfmNE=hKPA5F8X-iCeZk4J+Mhijyk0BLXD2qVWZ-M5-H+ejVQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2406676a28e05068244e3
X-Spam-Score: 0.9 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(ferdinando.ametrano[at]gmail.com)
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1XjEFS-00054E-TT
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Fwd: death by halving
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 21:24:16 -0000
--001a11c2406676a28e05068244e3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> > In november 2008 bitcoin was a much younger ecosystem,
>
> Or very old, indeed, if you are using unsigned arithmetic. [...]
>
:-) I meant 2012, of course, but loved your wit
> > and the halving happened during a quite stable positive price trend
>
> Hardly,
>
>
> http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/mtgoxUSD#rg60zczsg2012-10-01zeg2012-12-01ztgSzm1g10zm2g25zv
indeed!
http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/mtgoxUSD#rg60zczsg2012-08-01zeg2013-02-01ztgSzm1g10zm2g25zv
> There is a lot more complexity to the system than the subsidy schedule.
>
who said the contrary?
This thread is, in my opinion, a waste of time.
>
it might be, I have some free time right now...
many people have performed planning around the current
> behaviour. The current behaviour has also not shown itself to be
> problematic (and we've actually experienced its largest effect already
> without incident), and there are arguable benefits like encouraging
> investment in mining infrastructure.
>
I would love a proper rebuttal of a basic economic argument. If increased
competition will push mining revenues below 200% of operational costs, then
the halving will suddenly switch off many non profitable mining resources.
As of now the cost per block is probably already about 100USD, probably in
the 50-150USD.
Dismissed mining resources might even become cheaply available for
malevolent agents considering a 51% attack. Moreover the timing would be
perfect for the burst of any existing cloud hashing Ponzi scheme.
From a strict economic point of view allowing the halving jump is looking
for trouble. To each his own.
--001a11c2406676a28e05068244e3
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_e=
xtra"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote cla=
ss=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;=
border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex=
"><span>> In november 2008 bitcoin was a much younger ecosystem,<br><br>=
</span>Or very old, indeed, if you are using unsigned arithmetic. [...]<br>=
</blockquote><div>:-) I meant 2012, of course, but loved your wit=C2=A0</di=
v><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0p=
x 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border=
-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><span>> and the halving happened dur=
ing a quite stable positive price trend<br><br></span>Hardly,<br><br><a hre=
f=3D"http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/mtgoxUSD#rg60zczsg2012-10-01zeg2012-12=
-01ztgSzm1g10zm2g25zv" target=3D"_blank">http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/mt=
goxUSD#rg60zczsg2012-10-01zeg2012-12-01ztgSzm1g10zm2g25zv</a></blockquote><=
div><br></div><div>indeed!</div><div><a href=3D"http://bitcoincharts.com/ch=
arts/mtgoxUSD#rg60zczsg2012-08-01zeg2013-02-01ztgSzm1g10zm2g25zv" target=3D=
"_blank">http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/mtgoxUSD#rg60zczsg2012-08-01zeg201=
3-02-01ztgSzm1g10zm2g25zv</a></div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gm=
ail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-l=
eft-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">There =
is a lot more complexity to the system than the subsidy schedule.<br></bloc=
kquote></div>who said the contrary?</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></d=
iv><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"ma=
rgin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,=
204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">This thread is, in my opinio=
n, a waste of time.<br></blockquote><div>it might be, I have some free time=
right now...</div><div><br></div><div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" st=
yle=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb=
(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">many people have pe=
rformed planning around the current<br>behaviour. The current behaviour has=
also not shown itself to be<br>problematic (and we've actually experie=
nced its largest effect already<br>without incident), and there are arguabl=
e benefits like encouraging<br>investment in mining infrastructure.<br></bl=
ockquote><div><br></div><div>I would love a proper rebuttal of a basic econ=
omic argument. If increased competition will push mining revenues below 200=
% of operational costs, then the halving will suddenly switch off many non =
profitable mining resources. As of now the cost per block is probably alrea=
dy about 100USD, probably in the 50-150USD.</div><div>Dismissed mining reso=
urces might even become cheaply available for malevolent agents considering=
a 51% attack. Moreover the timing would be perfect for the burst of any ex=
isting cloud hashing Ponzi scheme.</div></div><div>From a strict economic p=
oint of view allowing the halving jump is looking for trouble. To each his =
own.</div><div><br></div></div></div></div>
--001a11c2406676a28e05068244e3--
|
