Author: Eric Voskuil 2016-03-02 19:01:36
Published on: 2016-03-02T19:01:36+00:00
The discussion revolves around the impact of changing futures on capital investments and returns in Bitcoin. The predictability of these futures makes them continuous, which is why inflation in Bitcoin is considered a cost rather than a tax. Changing these futures would punish those who have properly planned their investments and favor those who have not. This creates uncertainty and goes against the very purpose of Bitcoin, which is to prevent this type of unpredictability. In the context of mining hardware, a drop in revenue due to halving of subsidy could be absorbed by the network if hashing costs are split between capital and marginal costs. This means businesses would spend less on capital, resulting in lesser mining hardware than usual. A 6-month investment with 3 months each on high and low subsidies would not be feasible if it only generated a small profit in the first 3 months and massive losses in the second period of 3 months.
Updated on: 2023-06-11T04:16:24.390246+00:00