/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>53239190
jup, been at 0.6 XMR for months now

>>52312031
>has more use case than bitcoin

>>51652689
just finally give us the total collapse of the markets. i want ultra cheap coins again
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzbLODUb1sA

>>51689707
for monero node? terrible idea. get something with physical AES like a rockpi 4 or a rockpro.

The quest for ai monerochan
https://www.veed.io/view/d9f41a79-3628-480b-81fa-b7a804a5e762

>>50518659
>Dont the BTC minings vote on blockchain improvements? So if this happens they will vote to change BTC
It's more complicated than that, and other parts of the ecosystem partake in the general decision making process, even if that process is censored, corrupt, or otherwise manipulated (see the entire reason as to why r/btc even exists, that's one nice rabbit hole to go down). Also why would you assume that miners would want to go through the hassle to try to implement a change that is largely unpopular with the rest of the ecosystem (see the fixation on the 21 million mark), and simply not swich chains/sell the hardware while they can. However, I would guess Bitcoin mining becoming unprofitable and fees getting higher, and the hashrate going down would occur over several halvings, thought I can see a point where the transactional fees growing, could create a snowball effect of people doing less transactions, less transaction meaning higher fees, so less people do transactions, etc.

But there are many factors at play here, so we'll see. Maybe they change their minds, maybe Bitcoin goes to 0 or has other significant problems and/or transformations before that point. Maybe companies and VCs in the ecosystem with large stakes in the LN will increase fees on the LN to subsidize L1 mining. It is the far future after all, but I would not be surprised if this problem will become more prevalent as 2024's halving is approaching.