If current difficulty growth CAGR stays the same those investing today will never breakeven

168101112

Comments

  • ilia7777ilia7777 Member Posts: 113
    @o0ragman0o I guess if you already made your money back the whole topic doesn't apply to you. Thanks for the link, that is an interesting piece of info.
  • dlehenkydlehenky Member Posts: 2,249 ✭✭✭✭


    Well I don't know how metaphysical you want to get here, but I personally don't see any fundamental value in anything humans do. I see all it's power structures and economies as artificial and destructive impositions upon the natural world which I so adore.

    Yes, yes indeed. One thing we humans have made no attempt to tame is our own egos. Destruction, Inc.
  • ilia7777ilia7777 Member Posts: 113
    Yes in a world full of useless stuff created by humans let our noisy graphic cards be a meaningful contribution to the bright Ethereum future of mankind. Forget about making profit and perceive it as a donation to Ethereum blockchain machine which will be the core of all the good that the world never saw before skinny Vitalik was born :smile:
  • workwork Member Posts: 2,084 ✭✭✭✭
    I must be missing something... I simply can't understand why the heck people think Ethereum has so much potential. It's just another blockchain and it is one that is destined to have an insanely bloated blockchain that few will have the diskspace to store, because an insane amount of data is built as part of the core, rather then as side layers like makes so much more sense.
  • syaoran99syaoran99 Member Posts: 204
    Well this price plummet only means that any new miners are doomed to never get ROI
  • syaoran99syaoran99 Member Posts: 204
    @work you got what you wished for. The demise of ETH because price is dropping. You just want the world to burn don't you? The more ETH drops and the more people get burned, the more miners who unknowingly waste money getting new cards the better for you right?

    I don't understand why there are those who just want to see others squirm
  • dlehenkydlehenky Member Posts: 2,249 ✭✭✭✭
    @syaoran99 Who are you talking to?
  • shawn_Blah_Blahshawn_Blah_Blah Member Posts: 57
    It's the Ethageddon !!! Run, it's all over the price fell 10% Arghhhhhhhh!
  • oslakoslak Member Posts: 191
    edited April 2016
    This thread just keep getting better and better.
  • syaoran99syaoran99 Member Posts: 204
    @dlehenky to @work he seems to want to have ETH plummet to become valueless because it's just another blockchain. So why have it at 12 USD? might as well be just another blockchain worth 0.01USD right?

    Sheesh. I find it so annoying when people start dissing on something they themselves couldn't create and yet are so critical of as if they were some expert who knew what it could and would be.

    Puh Lease. If that someone was SO knowledgeable then he wouldn't be just another "layman" would he? He'd already invented something and then become among the richest people in the world.

    That said, I do not get the idea of the same someone who enjoys telling others to MINE MORE without telling them to study up on the potential losses that they could be exposed to as new miners. I mean this topic IS about telling others WHAT TO CONSIDER and LOOK OUT FOR.

    So again why are these people trying to shut those who're legitly concerned for the well being of other new would-be miners? What do they have to gain when new miners join the network and increase difficulty to the point it's non-profitable for miners? Hoping that more would sell their ETH cheap out of desperation and fear? All a plot for their self gain I'm sure. Like seriously, new miners should learn to identify these market manipulators as well and learn to discern who to trust and who not to.

    Or maybe, that someone who wants ETH to be unpopular is hoping that with ETH's demise, their BTC that they're bag holding onto would increase in value? Again, such a deep rooted ploy for their own personal gain.
  • dlehenkydlehenky Member Posts: 2,249 ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 2016
    @syaoran99 I don't think at-work is anywhere near the sinister/cynical character you paint him as. He helps a lot of noobies, he freely shares his considerable knowledge, and he admits when he gets it wrong. He comes from a BTC LTC beginning, and I think he has a lot of confidence in the value of BTC. ETH is a completely different technology, and even VB will tell you it has yet to become a proven technology, so given that, it really doesn't surprise me that he expresses the views on ETH that he does. However, I can assure you he does not have some hidden desire to see everyone involved here go down in flames. That's just my take on it.
  • o0ragman0oo0ragman0o Member, Moderator Posts: 1,291 mod
    work said:

    I must be missing something... I simply can't understand why the heck people think Ethereum has so much potential. It's just another blockchain and it is one that is destined to have an insanely bloated blockchain that few will have the diskspace to store...

    @work

    Bitcoin <~> Calculator
    Ethereum <~> Computer

    For me, that's the basic difference in potential and which sets Ethereum apart from any other blockchain.

  • workwork Member Posts: 2,084 ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 2016
    @dlehenky thanks, couldn't have said it better myself. I don't _want_ to see Eth fail or new miners lose money, I just think there is a decent chance of that happening.

    Mining is always a risky game. If you come into it thinking you're getting free easy money, there's a good chance you'll get burned.

    @o0ragman0o both Eth and Bitcoin are ledgers, capable of the same trustless record keeping, albeit in slightly different ways. Ethereum integrates the EVM (as you put it, computer-part) built into the blockchain. You can accomplish the same thing using bitcoin as the ledger, just with the EVM code off chain. In fact, this is already true and happening - there are 2 implementations of the ethereum virtual machine on top of bitcoin already released.

    My main concerns for Eth's future, (which btw, I hope can be overcome, but I seriously doubt) are PoS's inability to provide enough ecconomic incentive to secure the blockchain, and that the blockchain will become so large with insanely fast blocks and unlimited data storage that very few will be able to store it.
  • oslakoslak Member Posts: 191
    Eth and bitcoin should never be compared. Math behind the two are completely different. Bitcoin is less complicated compared to eth. Lost in the woods of gavin trying to follow his concept of ethereum blocks and verification.
  • syaoran99syaoran99 Member Posts: 204
    @dlehenky @work
    My apologies then. I'm a tad bit more emotional today as poloniex bears have been spouting tons of crap regarding ETH. Anyhow, I still stand by the potential of ETH being something big. Not alone but with the support of other block chains.

    That said it still doesn't mean that miners should blindly invest in more equipment at this point as down the road this is not going to bode well especially with the potential of Ethereum being as untested as claimed by many people. Again I'm a pretty large scale miner and this currency drop has affected my projected profits. There goes my dream house :(

    I'm now worried that I won't be able to cover rent for the place I'm mining at should difficulty increase exponentially the way it does. I would hope that new miners out there take due diligence in calculating their ROI and expenses and not make the same mistake that I've committed myself to. From personal experience.

    That said, @work won't the file size issue be solved if they managed to create some sort of file compression system or archive?

    As for economic incentive what do you mean? That it's easy to just but up all the ETH and become the core verifier? Or did you mean that there's not enough profit for stakers that it would not encourage them to risk staking just because it's only a 10%p.a profit?

    Both could be solved by increasing either the ETH price/amount or %of eth mined for stakes isn't it? Also to increase the number of stakes as well.
  • dlehenkydlehenky Member Posts: 2,249 ✭✭✭✭
    @syaoran99 I think the way that VB described PoS as being phased in in 3 steps is telling. I'm not convinced that even he is sure that PoS (Casper) is the right solution, yet. Only time will tell. As I've said before, Ethereum is a lot of bleeding edge research in motion. Not every concept is going to take root, and many will go through a number of iterations before the final implementation is in hand. For me, that's what make ETH so exciting and full of promise.
  • BiodomBiodom Member Posts: 693 ✭✭✭
    @syaoran99
    Miners usually don't listen to trollbox fast traders...to each their own.
  • workwork Member Posts: 2,084 ✭✭✭✭
    @syaoran99 all good, sir. I felt the emotion in your post and didn't take offence.

    Even with compression/archiving, it is still a potentially insane amount of data. People complain about the 65GB bitcoin blockchain already, and Ethereum's chain will almost certainly baloon into the TBs quickly if it enters common use.

    By economic incentive, I mean the system by which Bitcoin or Ethereum keeps miners honest and the blockchain straight (not a crazy tree with competing forks).

    With proof of work/hashcash, the incentive is externalized in the price of hardware. To disrupt the bitcoin blockchain (or ethereum under PoW), you must obtain enough hardware to compete with the entire network (accounting for selfish mining, a new entrant would need to buy hardware equal to 80-100% of the exisiting network infrastructure). Obtaining that hardware would not only be near impossible (in the case of bitcoin at least), but insanely expensive. The idea then is that anyone spending the money on that much equipment would be better served by simply mining honestly.

    Under proof of stake, the incentive to remain honest is internalized, and therefore always a subset of the total market cap. Even with the casper concept of punishing dishonest actors in the system, I remain highly unconvinced that the economic incentive for stakers can be sufficient to deter bad behavior (that would lead to chain forks).
  • dlehenkydlehenky Member Posts: 2,249 ✭✭✭✭
    Biodom said:

    @syaoran99
    Miners usually don't listen to trollbox fast traders...to each their own.

    I don't even know what that means???
  • thesmokingmanthesmokingman Member Posts: 152 ✭✭

    @thesmokingman, ahh no. 5 eth was always the full reward and there was an intention that Frontier would pay 10% of that. However, because Olympic testing went so well they decided not to reduce Frontier's rewards.

    dlehenky said:

    @thesmokingman, ahh no. 5 eth was always the full reward and there was an intention that Frontier would pay 10% of that. However, because Olympic testing went so well they decided not to reduce Frontier's rewards.

    Yes, that's was the original intent. I was pleasantly surprised when Frontier launched with the full 5 ETH block award. 50 would be deadly, IMO.
    @o0ragman0o @dlehenky Sorry. Thought I read where the reward was supposed to be 50.

    From the Ethereum Blog Dated March 3, 2015
    https://blog.ethereum.org/2015/03/03/ethereum-launch-process/

    Frontier showcases three areas of real utility:

    you can mine real Ether, at 10% of the normal Ether issuance rate, 0.59 Ether per block reward, which can be spent to run programs or exchange for other things, as normal – this real Ether (This was not the case at launch – Frontier block reward is 5 Ether per block, and will remain that amount until Casper).

    Release Step Two: Homestead

    Homestead is where we move after Frontier. We expect the following three major changes.

    Ether mining will be at 100% rather than 10% of the usual reward rate (Frontier/Homestead block reward will remain 5 Ether)
  • dlehenkydlehenky Member Posts: 2,249 ✭✭✭✭
    @thesmokingman No worries, it's all just history.
  • o0ragman0oo0ragman0o Member, Moderator Posts: 1,291 mod
    syaoran99 said:

    @o0ragman0o both Eth and Bitcoin are ledgers, capable of the same trustless record keeping, albeit in slightly different ways. Ethereum integrates the EVM (as you put it, computer-part) built into the blockchain. You can accomplish the same thing using bitcoin as the ledger, just with the EVM code off chain. In fact, this is already true and happening - there are 2 implementations of the ethereum virtual machine on top of bitcoin already released.

    My main concerns for Eth's future, (which btw, I hope can be overcome, but I seriously doubt) are PoS's inability to provide enough ecconomic incentive to secure the blockchain, and that the blockchain will become so large with insanely fast blocks and unlimited data storage that very few will be able to store it.

    @work, Ethereum is a Turing complete computer whereas Bitcoin is purposefully Turing incomplete in that it cannot branch or loop. Bitcoin's application is unto a ledge with some trying to retrofit higher functionality.

    Ethereum's application as a ledger is only part of it's functionality. It also holds a variable state. Furthmore, it is still yet to include Whisper and Swarm as it's live messaging and distributed storage sub-systems. Given the likes of Slock.it, Ethereum can be intergated into and sense/control/affect real world physical systems.

    As for the storage bloat, it's not like they're ignoring it or have ever ignored it. Gav Woods has now acheived State Tree Pruning in the Parity client which decimates the storage requirments
  • dlehenkydlehenky Member Posts: 2,249 ✭✭✭✭
    @o0ragman0o I believe Swarm has been replaced by IPFS, unless it's just a name game.
  • o0ragman0oo0ragman0o Member, Moderator Posts: 1,291 mod
    @dlehenky, I haven't heard anything official about that. IPFS already exists as a seperate project so people have been integrating it for storage. Swarm is to be fully integrated as part of Ethereum and will include accounting (and presumably the other two A's as well).
  • workwork Member Posts: 2,084 ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 2016
    I am so far unable to see the ethereum blockchain as anything other then a settlement ledger. Probably because that's what it is, with the turing complete EVM in its core. There's other fancy stuff on top, I certainlty get that; I just personally don't see why it should be or benefits from being core functionality.

    Building on too of bitcoin is hardly rhetrofitting. It's using the ledger to its fullest extent.

    State tree pruning is hardly a new concept, and I highly doubt it is sufficient to prevent the ether blockchain balooning into TB+ territory.

    To me, blockchain immutability and security will be of the highest importance as blockchain tech progresses. Anything beyond that is just as effective as a side-chain over cored code.
  • dlehenkydlehenky Member Posts: 2,249 ✭✭✭✭
    @o0ragman0o Slock.it is talking IPFS, and mentioned Swarm as having been eclipsed. I really don't know.
  • workwork Member Posts: 2,084 ✭✭✭✭
    dlehenky said:

    @o0ragman0o Slock.it is talking IPFS, and mentioned Swarm as having been eclipsed. I really don't know.

    IPFS is a damn cool idea. I doubt it will replace the existing web in any near future tho. Still, like Ether, pretty damn shiny, cool, and new.
  • o0ragman0oo0ragman0o Member, Moderator Posts: 1,291 mod
    work said:

    I am so far unable to see the ethereum blockchain as anything other then a settlement ledger.

    @work, but it is intrinsically programmable and responsive to a changing state. That is something far more than a ledger.
  • workwork Member Posts: 2,084 ✭✭✭✭
    @o0ragman0o my point is, how is that special? You can build the same thing on top of any disteibutes ledger. I don't see the benefit of forcing every computation on every node. In fact, I see several disadvantages. (This obviously ignores sharding; but that's only theory as far as I've seen, and doesn't change the main idea).
  • o0ragman0oo0ragman0o Member, Moderator Posts: 1,291 mod
    work said:

    @o0ragman0o my point is, how is that special? You can build the same thing on top of any disteibutes ledger.

    @work To be able to loop is a dimensionally higher degree of computational freedom so it is intrinsically a more powerful platform regardless of it's implementation. From the ground up it is built as a general compute machine whereas Bitcoin's goals were both specific and experimental, a) can we have a viable decentralised currency? and b) can we do it on a decentralised database?

    Bitcoin has been highly successful in both those areas and has shone light on far greater potentials than could be realised at the time of it's creation. Just because those newer potentials can be bolted onto bitcoin, doesn't mean it is the best vehicle for their implementation.
    work said:

    I don't see the benefit of forcing every computation on every node.

    You mean, like Bitcoin and every other derivative coin does already? It's not ideal but again, it's under active research. You've been in this game along time, what more could you expect or suggest?
Sign In or Register to comment.