interesting.
Yes, this is what I said in my post here…
Bitcoin and Peercoin are competing for the same role. The main difference (besides PoW & PoS) is that Bitcoin started its life out trying to become the ultimate decentralized network for payments without requiring a significant enough fee to filter out spam transactions. As a result, Bitcoin’s blockchain became huge and only now are they starting to realize that payments may not be the best role for Bitcoin. At the same time, Peercoin was launched from the very beginning with only the backbone/gold role in mind and has remained uncorrupted and true to that purpose.
Peercoin is cheap right now, yes, but I don’t expect that to remain the case. If Bitcoin does succumb to its massive blockchain and PoW unsustainability issues, then large miners will start to jump ship. If they switch to mining Peercoin, then the mining reward will drop significantly, causing Peercoin to become rarer and more expensive, which will cause even more miners to jump ship. I believe that Peercoin can only succeed if Bitcoin eventually collapses. Until that happens, Bitcoin will reign supreme in this role.
On the other hand, Nu doesn’t need to wait for Bitcoin to fail first, as it’s not competing for the same role. Nu’s price stability gives it the potential to succeed now.
1 Like
Miners will jump the ship due to economical reasons.
The next coinbase reward halving in the Bitcoin network will be an important event.
If the Bitcoin price before the halving is at less than double the price needed to achieve a positive ROI, mining will be affected from the halving.
I bet for some mining operations this is true and mining devices will be shut off.
But the halving has another effect.
If the demand for BTC (measured e.g. in BTC per day) remains constant, the halving will lead to increased BTC prices, because only approximately 1,800 BTC will be created per day after the halving (compared to 3,600 BTC daily now).
My prediction for the coinbase reward halving is that in the weeks after the halving it will increase the BTC price by 10% to 30% compared to the weeks before the halving. I expect some more drastic swings as well.
This won’t be enough to operate all miners with positive ROI. They will drop off the Bitcoin network and some of it might mine PPC afterwards.
The coinbase reward halving will increase the centralization of Bitcoin mining.
That is one of the reasons I’d like to see a successful Ethereum and not a rootstock that is dependent on Bitcoin.
Short-term to mid-term the economical situation might look better for rootstock than it does for Ethereum.
Long-term that creates the same dangerous dependency on the BTC price level Bitcoin might once suffer from.
If rootstock can offer similar features Ethereum does offer, but at a lower price, it’s bad for Ethereum and good for rootstock.
Rootstock might easily be ported to e.g. Peercoin reducing the costs for sustaining it by orders of magnitude - who knows.
Either way (with rootstock based on BTC or on PPC) it doesn’t look too good for Ethereum.
It looks like a train wreck waiting to happen.
But I think it will be years from now until it happens.
The Ethereum project is an interesting idea. Would be a pity to see it fail - and all that will be built on top of it.
The transition from PoW to PoS could reduce the costs for sustaining Ethereum by far.
Does anybody know where that’s placed on Ethereum’s agenda?
The start with PoW seems to be related with the time it would have taken to create a PoS system for Ethereum - they didn’t want to wait for that.
1 Like
We saw no effect of halving on Litcoin’s price recently…
Well, that’s sort of what I meant, both technical and economic unsustainability.
BTC’s value comes also from its blockchain as well (as technology).
So many start ups are build on top of BTC’s blockchain and that gives BTC its “high” value.
Ethereum is totally indepent from BTC’s blockchain. If this will be good or bad, it’s a mystery, who knows.
When and if start ups are going to use ethereum, then its value will be high as well.
The same goes also for peercoin 
1 Like
I saw some effects:
speculators betting on rising prices and creating a price surge in anticipation of LTC’s coinbase reward halving end of August:
But there was no lasting and visible drop of hash rate after the reward halving:
Only for a short time in late August the hash rate dropped by approximately 20%:
You might ask why. Here’s my explanation:
until early June this year the price per LTC was (far) below $2 - even at $1.35:
Now the price per LTC is $3:
The increased LTC price compensated the reduced reward (price roughly doubled).
Mining LTC is as profitable as it was before the halving.
1 Like
In today’s world, the top 500 super computer altogether cannot 51% bitcoin network, But I doubt XPM hashrate will get as high as bitcoin or even 1/10 of it after releasing 5 years, ie 2018.
The key is how much hashrate OUTOF XPM network to 51% attack you. Moore Law also applies on the attackers hashrate. Without high hashrate, PoW is rubbish.
With regard to PoS, is the community a scarce resource? In a large cryptocommunity, I guess 20% people are hardcore cryptofans, and 80% are just fortune hunters, speculators, and the majority can easily shift to another community if they have not already joined multiple communities.
2 Likes
Since PPC is cheap as water, why not buy some PPC and PoS mint? Stupid to mint PoW part of PPC.
If the bitcoin buy side(FIAT) is constant, the halving reward may double the bitcoin price.
So Hashrate maintained. Most miners only care about FIAT income, that’s why satoshi is smarter than sunny king.
Economically, from a production cost perspective, bitcoin works well, peercoin does not not.
Technologically, from a decentralization perspective, it is the opposite.
Nu combines the best of both worlds: you hold nushares, which decentralizes the network because you expect it would bring you dividends.
2 Likes
For me, a PoS share system with scarce resource(BTC,FIAT) in it is the perfect model.
The PoS mecahnism resolves decentralization issue and scarcity maintained by scarce resource.
Nubit and B&C are good.
2 Likes
It doesn’t need to compare with other coin. You were talking about scarcity. XPM only needs to see its own diff following Moores Law to keep its eventual scarcity.
It’s a different matter entirely. Why no one 51% XMP now?
Are you suggesting that all a country needed to have the strongest currency is to make the most expensive money?
1)not worthy to do that
2)protected by SK checkpoint, a centralized XPM.
“Scarcity”, a low hashrate XPM can easily be copied, if it is worthy of being copied at all.
Gold/silver/crude oil can also be used to support NBT in future, at least theoretically. Anything scarce is OK, except those easily manufactured.
1 Like
You already forgot Rieman(sp?) coin. Without a community the XPM copycat faded away.
1 Like
is there any XPM community in this world?
There may not be a large community behind it, (I don’t own any) but there is Sunny’s reputation backing it.
One person, centralized. Even SK’s week reports seldom mention XPM, leave along the dead sub forum.
1 Like
We thought we had it good when Peercoin was $8.50 a coin, but we all know how that turned out. They better convert some of that to NuBits while they can.
2 Likes
That’s a substantial burn rate
I guess it’s a go big or go home mentality.
1 Like