The average mining cost of 1 bitcoin as of December 2nd 2024 is $91,271.
You can argue the value of bitcoin is nothing but that's not how value works. Value is based on the price someone is willing to pay and the cost to obtain that good.
I'm not a Bitcoin shill, and I can see a scenario where the value of Bitcoin drops 90%. But when you have an asset that is expensive to create, is fungible, and can't be copied, you can't just say it's not worth anything because you feel like it.
Value is defined on tangible trade, aka worth, not simply bcz some one believes an exchange can be negotiated based on labor. You don't pay for spoiled milk. You don't pay a mechanic for an unfixed engine bcz he looked and tried.
Did you read see the part where I said earlier where I could see a scenario where Bitcoin could drop 90% in value. I'd hardly characterize that perspective as a gambling addiction. Your comments are out of touch and don't add anything of value to the conversation.
The value of an individual mining reward is very small relative to all extant bitcoins. When you mine often enough, the value of your reward is rightly comparable to the amount of work you've done, all the goal and nongoal calculations averaged together. If Bitcoin rewarded lucky stiffs unduly it'd be unfair, but it's proven rigorously that it doesn't, it rewards committed laborers.
Authors get paid for the thousands of hours of writing, not just for the time it takes an uneducated typist to copy out the final text.
Yes, u/pkvi_eid, real crypto is mathematically provable labor, which is why it's a real asset. Since BTC proved that, there have been Ponzis and Madoffs everywhere scamming the people who can't tell NFT fake-blockchain from real assets. But BTC keeps rising, overall, because nobody can argue with actual math. Basically the same math as RSA, which is worth trillions.
I agree. If everyone knew how easy and cheap it is to create their own ERC-20 token or a Solana token (which is what most scam coins are), they would think crypto is worthless too.
My favorite current example is Hawk Tuah coin.
1 billion tokens minted out of thin air in a single Solana contract with a peak market cap of 3.17 million dollars. After a 95% decline, a current market cap of 98.8k.
No wonder people think crypto is has no value.
Anyway, major proof of work and proof of stake crypto currencies do have intrinsic value. You just have to know the difference.
Its not. You have the burden of proof of proof and yet you can only show processing not actually application or static functionality other than human negotiated b/s
The white paper proves proof. The math is open. Desirable labor processing is a good. It may be "busywork" in one sense, but its value is that it is proven by blockchain to have contributed to objectively awarded holdings, and more have come to realize that this busywork is a lot more valued than that of the federal government deskworkers.
I could certainly publish here my unique further proof that Bitcoin itself involves some deception and frontloading for early adopters, and I have evidence I haven't seen anyone else publish. But this is knowably without my publication, and the distribution system itself is resilient and scalable enough to overcome its flaws. And that's a totally different argument from saying you don't value the proven labor that a bunch of other people value. It works whether you join it or not, and even whether people bail on it ("run" or "crash" it) or not.
The average mining cost of 1 bitcoin as of December 2nd 2024 is $91,271.
You can argue the value of bitcoin is nothing but that's not how value works. Value is based on the price someone is willing to pay and the cost to obtain that good.
I'm not a Bitcoin shill, and I can see a scenario where the value of Bitcoin drops 90%. But when you have an asset that is expensive to create, is fungible, and can't be copied, you can't just say it's not worth anything because you feel like it.
https://en.macromicro.me/charts/29435/bitcoin-production-total-cost
Value is defined on tangible trade, aka worth, not simply bcz some one believes an exchange can be negotiated based on labor. You don't pay for spoiled milk. You don't pay a mechanic for an unfixed engine bcz he looked and tried.
I don't often see someone get as much wrong in a comment to the extent you just did.
Labor is an in important factor in goods and services and exchanges and are frequently negotiated on just that -- labor.
I do, it's called cheese.
You clearly haven't dealt much with mechanics.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MechanicAdvice/comments/bpxsxt/do_you_still_pay_a_mechanic_even_if_they_didnt/
Keep coping about your gambling addiction, right up until you either see it was a scam to condition you to digital or the power goes off and you kys
Did you read see the part where I said earlier where I could see a scenario where Bitcoin could drop 90% in value. I'd hardly characterize that perspective as a gambling addiction. Your comments are out of touch and don't add anything of value to the conversation.
The value of an individual mining reward is very small relative to all extant bitcoins. When you mine often enough, the value of your reward is rightly comparable to the amount of work you've done, all the goal and nongoal calculations averaged together. If Bitcoin rewarded lucky stiffs unduly it'd be unfair, but it's proven rigorously that it doesn't, it rewards committed laborers.
Authors get paid for the thousands of hours of writing, not just for the time it takes an uneducated typist to copy out the final text.
Yes, u/pkvi_eid, real crypto is mathematically provable labor, which is why it's a real asset. Since BTC proved that, there have been Ponzis and Madoffs everywhere scamming the people who can't tell NFT fake-blockchain from real assets. But BTC keeps rising, overall, because nobody can argue with actual math. Basically the same math as RSA, which is worth trillions.
I agree. If everyone knew how easy and cheap it is to create their own ERC-20 token or a Solana token (which is what most scam coins are), they would think crypto is worthless too.
https://docs.alchemy.com/docs/how-to-create-an-erc-20-token-4-steps
https://solana.com/developers/guides/getstarted/how-to-create-a-token
https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/hawktuuuah/
My favorite current example is Hawk Tuah coin. 1 billion tokens minted out of thin air in a single Solana contract with a peak market cap of 3.17 million dollars. After a 95% decline, a current market cap of 98.8k.
No wonder people think crypto is has no value.
Anyway, major proof of work and proof of stake crypto currencies do have intrinsic value. You just have to know the difference.
Thanks for the hard details on Hawk Tuah. Only Trump can make money in NFTs, and that's because of numismatics and not "nonfungibility".
Its not. You have the burden of proof of proof and yet you can only show processing not actually application or static functionality other than human negotiated b/s
The white paper proves proof. The math is open. Desirable labor processing is a good. It may be "busywork" in one sense, but its value is that it is proven by blockchain to have contributed to objectively awarded holdings, and more have come to realize that this busywork is a lot more valued than that of the federal government deskworkers.
I could certainly publish here my unique further proof that Bitcoin itself involves some deception and frontloading for early adopters, and I have evidence I haven't seen anyone else publish. But this is knowably without my publication, and the distribution system itself is resilient and scalable enough to overcome its flaws. And that's a totally different argument from saying you don't value the proven labor that a bunch of other people value. It works whether you join it or not, and even whether people bail on it ("run" or "crash" it) or not.