{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1fxpmu0wykut57pw7d75tdfht8sv2ej7wlgvv7flgeqtt5mhgvh7syn8z7p","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1fxpmu0wykut57pw7d75tdfht8sv2ej7wlgvv7flgeqtt5mhgvh7syn8z7p","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2021-05-23\n📝 Original message:Well, it is done automatically every 4 years :) It is a self-balancing\nsystem - more people shout about Bitcoin being dirty -\u003e less adoption -\u003e\nlower the price -\u003e less energy consumption. Add on top the fact that in\n2024 block rewards will fall 50% anyway and someday it will be zero.\n\nI am all for making Bitcoin green(er), but IMHO there shall be no\nshort-termism of the sort \"Elon complained + price dropped 40% - lets go\nradically change things\".\n\nIMHO if we want to make BTC cleaner we can add functionality where users\ncan prioritise some miners over the others, with the view that users will\nprioritise \"green\" miners and they will get more TX fees, and there will be\neconomic incentive to go green.\n\nOn Sun, 23 May 2021, 09:49 James Lu via bitcoin-dev, \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e Background\n\u003e ===\n\u003e Reducing the block reward reduces the incentive to mine. It reduces the\n\u003e maximum energy price at which mining is profitable, reducing the energy use.\n\u003e\n\u003e Bitcoins have value because they are accepted by full node users, from\n\u003e individual node operators, to exchanges and custodians like Coinbase.\n\u003e Anything else and the Bitcoins don't exist and are worthless. Like all\n\u003e currencies, Bitcoin has value because others recognize that they have value.\n\u003e\n\u003e Idea\n\u003e ===\n\u003e Reduce the block reward by adding fewer coins to the UTXO set per block.\n\u003e This should be done gradually\n\u003e\n\u003e Consensus layer\n\u003e ===\n\u003e This is a soft fork, because it tightens the\n\u003e\n\u003e Some Possible Weaknesses\n\u003e ===\n\u003e - It will cost less than a nation-state of energy to reverse recent\n\u003e Bitcoin transactions.\n\u003e - Some miners may protest and lobby exchanges.\n\u003e - By pushing mining towards the cheapest energy sources, centralization\n\u003e increases towards Chinese miners.\n\u003e - The Bitcoin network may split if consensus is not built before flag day.\n\u003e\n\u003e However, given the current political headwinds and widespread public\n\u003e discussion around Bitcoin's energy use, it may be socially possible to\n\u003e ask individual users and major exchanges to install a version of Bitcoin\n\u003e with a reduced block reward.\n\u003e\n\u003e Alternatives\n\u003e ===\n\u003e Instead of outright rejecting transactions (and the blocks that contain\n\u003e them) that attempt to spend increased block rewards, treat them as no-ops.\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20210523/a3c73dd7/attachment-0001.html\u003e"}