fx 797a tdkc litecoin exchange rate
Will do corem sweeping article soon. Bitcoins will get daily payouts of your investment to your designated wallet. If I leave my coins in the exchange is there corem risk of losing them during bitcoins fork? Notify me guy follow-up comments by email. SegWit2x will not guy replay protection like Bitcoin Cash had.
libbitcoin obelisk paris menu В»
bitcoin qt terminal mac change
You can mine any cryptocurrency available in our catalogue! The worst line never intersects the threshold. I have bitcoins in my coinbase wallet and Luno too, does it mean i will lose them during the hard fork? Market leader Bitmain was only putting out less efficient machines at this point, but they haven't really been considered for this article even though there's a potential big impact in there. Small number, massive energy weight. EthPool Mining is a trusted partner in cloud mining industry business, known all across the industry for its high integrity, excellent customer oriented service and very safe n simple user friendly interface. Now its time to hear from you:
digital note bitcointalk annex
So we've exchanged some emails in guy I explained why I corem this method is based on cherry picking, and instead of providing any follow-up you decided to quote corem my emails to support guy statements about my energy index. I need advice from you, do i need to sell my bitcoin before the hard fork happen guy leave it there? Determining the upper bound for the bitcoins consumption is then easily done by making two worst-case assumptions. According to this Medium postas of May 25,bitcoins It is good that this fork is now called off but this has led a sudden spike in interest of users in Bitcoins Cash BCHwhich was corem in August.
bitcoin scrypt bitcointalk news В»
Will We Really Lose Bitcoin In The SegWit2x Fork?
CoinSutra welcomes you to another Bitcoin hard fork mess! In a recently concluded Bitcoin hard fork i. And now, again, the Bitcoin ecosystem, including every type of entity connected with it, is being tested because we have another Bitcoin hard fork scheduled for this November. I know some of you might wonder why this is happening because Bitcoin has already scaled, activated SegWit, and Bitcoin Cash supporters have already parted their ways with bigger block sizes.
SegWit2X is a fancy derivative name given to a combo of scaling solutions i. It simply means implementing SegWit first, and then within 3 months of SegWit activation, it aims at implementing a 2MB block size for the Bitcoin network. Now the present mess is about the implementation of the 2MB block size which is happening in mid-November But as I have described in my Bitcoin Improvement Proposal article, 2MB blocks will be implemented only when core developers and other players support this idea.
The exact time is not known yet, but it is scheduled to go live from block height And according to Blockchain. So you can see that we are only a few thousand blocks away from the SegWit2x hard fork.
If this fork happens, then everyone who was holding Bitcoin before the fork will have an equivalent number of these new SegWit2x coins. Those who were present at the Bitcoin Cash hard fork ceremony will surely understand this. The problem is it is really going to be very tricky and risky to claim our SegWit2x-version bitcoins.
This accessibility problem will emerge due to replay attack susceptibility on both chains. Read in detail about replay attacks.
I want to address this problem loud and clear for both those who were present and those who were not present during the Bitcoin Cash fork. SegWit2x will not have replay protection like Bitcoin Cash had.
It will rather have an opt-in replay protection in place. For the uninitiated, replay protection is a technical update that stops the same transaction from being broadcast on both chains. Due to this, SegWit2x is being highly criticized by legacy Bitcoin supporters because it is a kind of open attack on Bitcoin and its users. As a user, you yourself need to opt-in and apply for it. Check out this must-read piece written by Bitcoin developer Jimmy Song: How Segwit2x Replay Protection Works.
According to this Medium post , as of May 25, , representing You need not worry as it is unrelated to SegWit2x and has claimed to have replay protection in place.
Also, I have done a separate post on the Bitcoin Gold fork for CoinSutra readers, so just sit tight and follow this guide. But now that we have this opt-in replay protection thing, here is some other advice to avoid losing your funds:. Now its time to hear from you: What do you think about SgWit2x?
What will you do with your SegWit2x coins, if you get them? Waiting for your comments!! Everything that I said above is irrelevant and useless now because the Segwit2X fork now stands cancelled. I have published another post on it where you will learn everything that you should know.
It is good that this fork is now called off but this has led a sudden spike in interest of users in Bitcoin Cash BCH , which was formed in August. He has also several times claimed the Bitcoin Cash is the real Bitcoin that Satoshi Nakamoto wanted to create. The Bitcoin Cash price is certainly taking off after the Segwit2x collapse and it is quite evident from these memes as well as propaganda by Roger Ver.
What a great article! I have a Nano S but currently have my couple of bitcoins on Coinbase. I will certainly transfer them to the Nano S. However when I have tried it asks whether I want to choose Legacy or Segwit. Before reading your article I was thinking Segwit but now I think Legacy is best in order to keep my coins safe and avoid the possibility of a Replay Attack.
Am I correct with my newly found wisdom? I want to sell them before the fork appears and buy bitcoins if the price of bitcoin had fallen down to make profit. Another thing that you can do to hedge your position is to sell some HODL some. When the Segwit2X hard fork appears and is implemented without a proper replay protection in place it will create panic in the market.
The market is anyhow going to dump it and even you can expect a significant hash power shifting there if there is a reduced difficulty on Segwit2x.
Another thing that can happen is that prices fall dramatically in case users are replay attacked in absense of proper replay protection. Yes, this can happen. Lastly, its true that many companies are backing legacy BTC but Bitcoin Cash has shown us that a fork can exist. But this fork will be different and interesting to watch for because segwit2x developers say that they are not Altcoin they are Bitcoin and they are doing a bitcoin upgrade.
In my opinion, this kind of fork has not happened with any other crypto so it will something dramatic and worth watching. You realize you need to be able to predictable crack consecutive blocks to execute a replay attack. Sully Yeah, I understand cracking the consecutive blocks. But mostly let suppose you are paying a merchant immediately he can replay you if he knows how to do it.
Hi, if you store the Bitcoins on a Nano S hardware wallet, will you receive the other coins as well? Lennart There is no official communication regarding this yet, but looking at the way they did with Bitcoin cash, we are expecting they will add a feature which will make it easier for us to claim other forked coins. Just waiting till Novembers forks are over then praying I can sweep from bitaddress paper wallet with no problems all my coins 4 by then I think Right or 5?
Do I have to transfer to another wallet first? That would stink and expose my private key. Just wantto sweep them all to nano S. Can you please explain step by step. Never used my wallet yet paper. Lennart Yes, you will. If you put bitcoins in a savings account such as BtcPop, will you receive the fork coins as well? Can you trust this service BtcPop , since one needs to provide their private key? Is the amount of fork coins the same as the amount of bitcoins one owns?
So, does your capital double then? Does this mean that it is best to get more bitcoins before the fork? Will the bitcoin price rise before the fork and drop afterwards?
So the real worth of forked coins will be evaluated by the market forces. Do you mean a drop in BTC prise and then a rise? Or what do you mean? Because people are afraid of the fork? There is nothing to be afraid because at the end of the day one version of BTC will eventually survive. I just bought a Ledger Nano S.
I have all my money in an exchange Korbit. Ruben Ledger usually rolls out an update to help us claim free B2X coin. If you are asking about Sewgit2x claim on trezor, then yes you will be able to do that but in an unknown time in future. If you looking to buy Ledger too then buy it only from their official website. Here few detailed videos on Ledger Nano S that will help you get started with it. I have 1 BTC in coinbase. Coinbase stated that they will support it, however, i am not too sure when will they support.
I dont have Nano S or any other hardware wallet, so what are my options if i want to transfer to anything else. Anuj The best thing you can do right now is to use a mobile wallet. And transfer your coin to these wallets before the fork. Make sure to backup your seed word carefully. I am using a platform called LUNO. If I leave my coins in the exchange is there a risk of losing them during the fork? Mark Most probably yes. You can download a wallet like Coinomi or Jaxx on your phone and transfer coins to your wallet before the fork.
Hi Mark Im new in this and using Bitstamp. What should i do before the fork? What would you recommend? IF you have BTC in Bitstamp then take it out from there and put it in a wallet where you control your private keys or seed keys.
I only know of one site where you can have a BTC wallet, coinbase. All feedback is much appreciated, positive or negative.
Cass Coinbase has only stated to support segwit2x yet and that too has no ETA. They have not stated anything on BTG. Thank you for the article.. One question, Im new in this and using Bitstamp platform. What should i do before the fork for not losing the double coin? You can use a mobile wallet or a hardware wallet such as Android: Ledger Nano S and Trezor.
Sorry for the question but how can I keep them safe form attack? Amazing article, it definitely clarifies lots of things and it helps a lot. Also the replies on most people are very helpful.
Will people automatically sell their BTCs because of the high value? People who are doing day trading or short term trading will definitely sell BTC when they get their price target.
Coindesk is a good one to follow and here at CoinSutra we also sometimes discuss price analysis and altcoins to buy on our telegram channel. If you would like to join you are welcomed- https: I hope you can answer me, even tho it might be a rookie beginner question. Machines produced pre-Dec where my chart starts were produced in relatively small quantities that even their aggregate power consumption is not that high.
What about RockerBox and Neptune? Well again none of them were produced in large quantities: As to the timing of ASIC releases and hashrate measurements, the small inaccuracies should average out to zero some data points slightly overestimating, others slightly underestimating.
In the end, the real power consumption is going to be in between the lower and upper bound, far from each bound. Okay, so I quickly calculated the weight each phase has and put the result in the chart here: I also created one showing what happens when you change phase 0 only. Small number, massive energy weight.
We know rates can go as low as 2 cents. Where does that leave old Bitmain S2, S3 and S4 miners? I'd say this really adds quite some uncertainty to the proposed method. I was wondering why the method wasn't repeated in reverse?
If you can do it for the least efficient machines why not with the most efficient ones? This would make for a more interesting "lower bound". At least more comparable to the upper one. If you are going to input bad numbers into my model, you are going to get bad results out: That means a unknown but significant fraction of the hashrate was already 0. Therefore the average of a distribution of machines between 0.
Furthermore, you are wrong about 0. If we bumped phase 0 from 0. Market leader Bitmain was only putting out less efficient machines at this point, but they haven't really been considered for this article even though there's a potential big impact in there.
The new machines are never the problem when estimating energy consumption, it's the older ones that present the biggest challenge and are responsible for the majority consumption e. A second problem I see in the model is the lack of consistency. Economics are used to cut the tail, but if applied consistently I would expect some spillover effects so the hashrate increase during a period can never be completely attributed to the machines available during that period.
This is as simple as: This is something to be analyzed throughout, as it could cause a bias towards new more efficient machines. I think you're missing fees in the BE point calculation by the way. I'm a lot closer for Jul 10 0. Therefore the snapshot presented in this research as of 26 Feb break-even of 0. There is no potential big impact that the model is missing. If I have time I will correlate the evolution of the break-even with phases and see where its impact might be the greatest.
But I don't expect the effect to be very large. After all, later phases saw the introduction of machines more powerful than earlier phases, so only a minority of the hashrate added at a given phase might come from older machines. As to fees, I didn't take them into account because they don't need to. This doesn't change my phase 0 assumption: So we've exchanged some emails in which I explained why I think this method is based on cherry picking, and instead of providing any follow-up you decided to quote mine my emails to support false statements about my energy index.
Rather ironic don't you think? For anyone interested the email dump can be found here: In the meanwhile, Bitmain has delivered some evidence that a technical approach typically underestimates energy consumption.
If I may bring up again other points you commented on: As I expected, it is a non-problem and does not influence the model. So, of the 4 points you brought up so far, all have been refuted.
Meanwhile, practically all of my critics in BECI remain ignored See my comment and comment about points in your email dump in http: The Quartz article never says "1, miners were equal to 10 petahashes per second in processing power".
But even if you found a source making this claim, these numbers are obviously grossly rounded. He based his estimate on current growth rates for mining and the electricity consumed by computers doing the work. I couldn't find the original source of Chapman's analysis, but his core premise is flawed anyway. That's not how things work. The energy consumption follows the Bitcoin price, in this order.
The entire world's electricity production increases by only about 70 gigawatts per year. Chapman is blindly extrapolating current growth, without considering the real-world impossibilities of unbounded exponential growth. Is the system actualy becoming more secure with so much energy being used? And the more people join and every blocks they have to adjust the dificulty to match that target? Maybe mining shouldn't be so profitable..
Seem's we are all fighting each other and we are all greedy bastards What would be the necessary amount of energy required to run this system? What are your thoughts on this? It's unclear to me if you account for the fact that several different clusters could be trying to mine the next block, not only one of them will succeed while the rest will simply throw away the work they just did.
Do those wasted hash computations figure in your power consumption calculations? It's desirable to have this security margin. Multiple miners working on the same block means the statistical average amount of time it will take to solve it is reduced. I'd be curious to see something similar for the total electricity use for mining and transacting all crypto, including alts. Any guess at how much additional energy they are requiring as well? This is exactly the giant problem most of the crypto's face.
There is just no keeping up with that Burstcoin mines on harddisks, making it x less power hungry than BTC. Even if you dont care about all the other features the coin has, it still is a very interesting coin simply due to its extremely low power consumption! As the price goes up the percentage spent on electricity goes up when the price comes down the percentage of electricity cost comes down to a point.
Morgan Stanley actually talked with Bitmain's suppliers, and looked at the number of chips delivered to figure out how much the company can put out. Morgan Stanley includes non-electrical costs, so you are comparing apples to oranges. Look at their electrical-only cost per BTC: However it is not true that as the Bitcoin price goes up the percentage of mining revenues spent on electricity necessarily goes up.
As a direct counter-example you can look at the period from March through December In other words, mining has become more profitable. That said, regardless of the Bitcoin price, I do expect that the long-term trend years will be that electricity represents a bigger and bigger percentage.
It's represented by the profitability threshold curve in the section "Profitability threshold assumption": LOL, I'm spreading false information, ironic.. In any case, I've covered the full Morgan Stanley report here: See the references and a commentary on the data behind this chart: We start with a few observations about the latest 4 most efficient ASICs: But the clock and voltage configuration can be set to favor speed over energy efficiency.
All known third party BFCbased miner designs favor speed at 0. The company once advertised the BlockBox container achieved 0. KnCMiner Solar is exclusively deployed in their private data centers and achieves an efficiency of 0. Economics of mining Given the apparent high energy-efficiency, hence relatively small percentage of mining income that one needs to spend on electricity to cover the operating costs of an ASIC miner, it may seem that mining is an extremely profitable risk-free venture, right?
This day is economically and rationally the end-of-life of the S5. Past this point, mining is unwise or at best futile: Profitability threshold assumption The model presented in this post makes one assumption: Summary We can calculate the upper bound for the global electricity consumption of Bitcoin miners by assuming they deploy the least efficient hardware of their time and never upgrade it.
Updates On 11 March I removed the assumption that sales of A dwindled down to practically zero post-June , because although sales volume did decrease I do not have precise metrics to justify it. On 16 March I added the section Economics of mining. On 28 July I produced updated estimates in the conclusion. On 28 August I added the section Profitability threshold assumption. References and commentary The chart covers the period 15 December to 26 February Neptune launched in June and achieves 0.
Solar launched in June and achieves 0.