From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1XjEYO-0007SX-SV for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 21:43:48 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.223.175 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.223.175; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com; helo=mail-ie0-f175.google.com; Received: from mail-ie0-f175.google.com ([209.85.223.175]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1XjEYN-0007DC-TZ for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 21:43:48 +0000 Received: by mail-ie0-f175.google.com with SMTP id at20so1727475iec.20 for ; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 14:43:42 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.142.98 with SMTP id rv2mr2884270igb.8.1414532622119; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 14:43:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.107.159.3 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 14:43:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 21:43:42 +0000 Message-ID: From: Gregory Maxwell To: =?UTF-8?B?SsOpcsOpbWllIER1Ym9pcy1MYWNvc3Rl?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (gmaxwell[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1XjEYN-0007DC-TZ Cc: Bitcoin Development Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Fwd: death by halving X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 21:43:49 -0000 On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 9:19 PM, J=C3=A9r=C3=A9mie Dubois-Lacoste wrote: > The fact that a topic was brought up many times since a long time, > does not mean it is not relevant. I am not saying that it is "not relevant", I'm saying the discussion is pointless: No new information has arrived since the very first times that this has been discussed except that the first halving passed without incident. If people were not sufficiently convinced that this was a serious concern before there was concrete evidence (however small) that it was okay, then discussion is not likely going to turn out differently the 50th or 100th time it is repeated... except, perhaps, by wearing out all the most experienced and knowledgeable among us as we become tired of rehashing the same discussions over and over again. On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 9:23 PM, Ferdinando M. Ametrano wrote: [snip] > As of now the cost per block is probably already about 100USD, probably i= n > the 50-150USD. This is wildly at odds with reality. I don't mean to insult, but please understand that every post you make here consumes the time of dozens (or, hopefully, hundreds) of people. Every minute you spend refining your post has a potential return of many minutes for the rest of the users of the list. At current difficulty, with a SP30 (one of the leading-in-power-efficiency) marginal break-even is ~1144.8852 * $/kwh =3D=3D $/btc. At $0.10/kwh each block has an expected cost right now, discounting all one time hardware costs, close to $3000.