321–330 of 352 posts
The author suggests that the demand for ASICs may contribute to the chip shortage which then drives up GPU prices, but that doesn't explain the lack of correlation with CPU prices.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Once they successfully do the attack, they can take over the blockchains and allocate all cryptocurrencies to themselves, cash out, and it'd probably register as a good profit on their income statements. So they're going to manage to not sell any cards (without disclosing that as a public company), set up the infrastructure and do a 51% attack on bitcoin in front of everyone, then "cash out" as if there would be pe…
I hadn't considered this before, but that's a really compelling reason that a 51% attack would not be worth anyone's while. Seems like a successful 51% attack would just wreck bitcoin, and there wouldn't be any way to cash out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
.
This would show up in the CPUs. But their prices are stable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
GPUs are manufacturable. The market is meant to signal to manufacturers that this is profitable to make more of, and thus, more would become available in the future. Unfortunately, the current world events conspired to not allow this balance to happen - chip shortages and logistics problems etc. Give it a few more years, and it will balance back out.
Crypto is carefully designed to model Parkinson's Law. (Proof of) Work always grows to fill the compute available.
That makes the GPU market supply-constrained. Any increase in supply will be met with a lower price equilibrium which will result in more GPUs bought and used for mining. Which results in a higher THR which will be met with additional increases in network difficulty which will pull the demand curve to the right ad infinitum.
I'm not sure how much more economics 101 I can make this. As long as GPUs are part of the system, the GPU market will be supply-constrained. The supply and demand curves will continue to drift to the right.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if no existing coins switch to PoS (spoiler: many will), the PoS coins will suck up fee-paying users from the PoW coins, reducing the returns on mining, which will result in lower network hashpower. It may also bring a second-order effect of reducing the prices of PoW coins, which will reduce dollar-denominated block rewards on those networks, and that will bring hashpower down even farther.
ETH continues to grow its hashrate every day. Even in the face of growing competition, hashrate grows. It's an interesting theory, but there's no evidence of you being right. We already have many extremely high market-cap PoS coins, many with more features than ETH will have even after it's PoS transition, yet PoW hash continues to skyrocket.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even after a decade, users here still don't know the basics of how blockchains work. Lol "A GPU attack on BTC" Jésus help us
There is no reason enough GPUs can't do it. Yes it is more expensive then getting the same hash rate via ASICs but the profitability off a 51% attack is a lot higher and NVIDIA would get their own chips at a reduced rate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s less significant than you might think as US GDP is almost 1/4 of global GDP and foreign countries don’t keep that many USD on hand. Aka even in global terms US GDP is vast. Also, Bitcoin has significantly more vulnerabilities than just a 51% attack or a crash as nodes need to be connected to the internet and therefore can at least in theory be hacked. What exactly happens after that point is anyones guess, but…
> That’s less significant than you might think as US GDP is almost 1/4 of global GDP and foreign countries don’t keep that many USD on hand. Aka even in global terms US GDP is vast. Sure, but the value of the dollar (like everything else) is in how easy it is to get (supply). The US GDP is not a measure of the supply of dollars on the market, it is a measure of how often those dollars are exchanged. > Bitcoin has sig…
The US GDP directly translates into the amount of taxes paid. Suppose a 50% drop in the value of USD happens. If nothing else happens taxes increase by 100%, and people need to acquire more USD which drives the value of the currency up.
You might wonder about economic hardship, but historically that causes deflation. +/- 2% per year without printing money is easy, but there is a reason you don’t see huge swings without the government printing money.
> counterfeiting
An issue for any physical currency but electronic currency actually operates independently. Trying to counterfeit large quantities of cash is therefore surprisingly difficult even for nation stale level actors. A great fake bill can get passed around, 10 billion in fake bills which is still a trivial amount would trip up various monitoring systems.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How many years has etherium been putting off proof of stake now? Two? Three?
I gave up on crypto because of the failed promise of proof of stake in ethereum especially. We are talking 2015 here. AFAIR it’s been minimum 6 years. Tezos has been looking interesting though I never looked in detail anymore. OCaml based, COQ checked code base and truly proof-of-stake last time I checked? Did anyone play with it in here? I know Ubisoft jumped on the lets-create-artificial-scarcity-where-we-can NFT h…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a circular argument. Why are CPU prices a confounding factor?
one can imagine factors that would cause both CPU and GPU prices to increase together. for example general purpose computing demand or supply-side constraints might cause all chip prices to rise. if those non-crypto factors were confounding (say also happened to correlate with crypto-prices maybe due to some third unknown factor) then we would see CPU and GPU prices rise in response to crypto prices. we do not see th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Historically, for many products, high demand leads to lower unit prices as manufacturers become more efficient. Since we're a decade into GPU mining, there's been a lot of time for manufacturers to adjust. While so far they have not been able to keep up with demand, I don't think it's clear that they never will.
Sorry, not following. Can you explain how efficiencies in GPU production interact with network difficulty to produce lower GPU prices? I'm not finding much in the literature.