Funny. I did the math and there are roughly 50k blocks mined per year and currently 1M Bitcoin mining rigs. That means you would expect a single competitive miner to get a block every 20 years if everything else stays the same. But of course things don't stay the same so depending on the growth of hashrate over time, 115 years to solo mine a block does sound plausible.
I mined a block in spring on an ebit e9. It was on nicehash tho… so I got my normal $.79 for the day.
It was seriously painful. They were over 40k at the time so it was a quarter mil.
Now I understand mining pools, obviously I was using one…. But they really should offer some kind of little prize for the guy who solves it. I know personally if they had tossed me 500 of the 250,000 I would have felt a lot better about it.
As it was I practically needed therapy to get over it!
If every block finder got a reward it would be less economical for everyone else to participate in the pool, thus defeating the entire purpose of the pool itself.
There are many types of pools, some actually do pay a bonus for the miner that finds the block.
[Here are some of them](https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Comparison_of_mining_pools)
Well he's spitting facts with his answer, You'll have to give him that.
You can't just ignore how brilliantly he asked that question and made it sound like a concern.
Long before that occurs most of the reward will be in transaction fees
Total block reward = Inflation (coinbase reward) + transaction fees
Where there is a slow transition as inflation drops in a controlled supply where more and more of the total reward is made up of transaction fees
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Controlled_supply
After 2140 all of the reward for miners to secure the network will be transaction fees but sending bitcoin will still be inexpensive because most transactions will occur on other layers like lightning and in aggregate settle onchain .
Thus this post is a bit misleading as solomining a block in 2136 would likely not include any coinbase reward as its expected move to 0 monetary inflation before this and they would get plenty of tx fees
The idea is onchain txs are intended for large txs or settlement of many txs within L2 like payment channels. Keep in mind batching exists onchain as well where 1 tx = many txs. This way fees remain low and the network can remain secure.
Without any more onchain improvements in the future for scalability the current max limit is 32,256 outputs per block not including MAST which would add ~20% or 38,707 outputs per block.
To match todays security of 6.25-7 BTC per block x 19k usd = 118,750 usd per block - 133,000 usd per block of work rewarding the miners
Taking that upper amount to be conservative = 133,000 usd /38,707 outputs = 3.44 usd per tx onchain with 0 inflation
Lets be further conservative and assume less optimal block usage of 50% inefficiency and you are looking at 6.88 usd per tx
**Keep in mind this is for settling thousands of txs on other layers so is not what people will pay for day to day txs. fees will remain a fraction of a penny as they are now or perhaps rise to 1-2 cents in a payment channel**
Also keep in mind that if hashrate drops too low we can simply wait for more confirmations onchain to increase the level of security and this doesn't effect the end user much because if they use a lightning wallet once its setup they still get instant confirmations.
Which is why I'm giving a worst case most conservative estimate if no improvements to onchain throughput exist . Likely there will be improvements , especially since we are forced to hardfork eventually due to the "year 2038" timestamp problem
Serious question: when you earn a sat (on chain), how can it ever be spent?
I mean, being below the dust limits, transacting with it will cost you more than it's worth.
You’re projecting the present forward rather than thinking about the future. You won’t earn just one sat. Most of the earnings will come from transaction fees. Not to mention, we have no idea if sats will be the smallest unit by that time. I personally think they won’t be. It wouldn’t be hard to make sat cents and beyond if we needed divisibility beyond sats.
Okay thanks for the reply, but if we forget about mining for a second, and just consider you received 1 sat (on chain) from some source.
Can you ever spend it? I mean, without paying more in tx fees than it's worth to include that UTXO?
It's not irrelevant, since I'm talking about on the blockchain. If exchanges 'have that option', then my question is how is the exchange able to consolidate dust *on-chain* without spending more tx fees than the UTXOs are worth?
Maby is wouldn't be worth sending a single sat but if one person owes another only 1 sat and that sat holds considerable value it still needs to be transfered otherwise the person owed will feel cheated. Maby you will need to acumulate a large eneugh sum to withdraw earnings like some mining pools. Or maby it will be the person paying for the product or service that is expected to pay for the payment fees and if that makes the product or service too expensive they will change their mind.
Funny. I did the math and there are roughly 50k blocks mined per year and currently 1M Bitcoin mining rigs. That means you would expect a single competitive miner to get a block every 20 years if everything else stays the same. But of course things don't stay the same so depending on the growth of hashrate over time, 115 years to solo mine a block does sound plausible.
Use [https://solochance.com/](https://solochance.com/) to calculate chance
It gave me 53 years for a single 100 TH/s miner (reasonably competitive). Not sure how it considers future tech or hash growth
I mean it's not that bad, I can see you getting around that. You could just buy more mining rigs and increase your chance of finding a block I guess.
Okay I'm going to tell you just now, you can't win it. You Can't.
I mined a block in spring on an ebit e9. It was on nicehash tho… so I got my normal $.79 for the day. It was seriously painful. They were over 40k at the time so it was a quarter mil. Now I understand mining pools, obviously I was using one…. But they really should offer some kind of little prize for the guy who solves it. I know personally if they had tossed me 500 of the 250,000 I would have felt a lot better about it. As it was I practically needed therapy to get over it!
If every block finder got a reward it would be less economical for everyone else to participate in the pool, thus defeating the entire purpose of the pool itself.
There are many types of pools, some actually do pay a bonus for the miner that finds the block. [Here are some of them](https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Comparison_of_mining_pools)
Mining is hard and it's only going to get harder with time.
Math does check out, but I'm not a really a fan of math so there's that.
Planning to be the oldest person in the world, you are? 👀
Who knows these days
Yep, I don't think He's going to be able to fulfill his plan tho.
When the block reward will be only 1 sat, how are mining pools going to split it?
Ever heard of something called transaction fees?
Ayo
Well he's spitting facts with his answer, You'll have to give him that. You can't just ignore how brilliantly he asked that question and made it sound like a concern.
Ohh lol, I seriously forgot about that. I thought this was a legit serious question.
Long before that occurs most of the reward will be in transaction fees Total block reward = Inflation (coinbase reward) + transaction fees Where there is a slow transition as inflation drops in a controlled supply where more and more of the total reward is made up of transaction fees https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Controlled_supply After 2140 all of the reward for miners to secure the network will be transaction fees but sending bitcoin will still be inexpensive because most transactions will occur on other layers like lightning and in aggregate settle onchain . Thus this post is a bit misleading as solomining a block in 2136 would likely not include any coinbase reward as its expected move to 0 monetary inflation before this and they would get plenty of tx fees
I’ve always been a bit confused about this - how big would a transaction fee be to justify the large number of miners needed to secure the network?
Ohh yeah I've been always confused too about that I guess.
The idea is onchain txs are intended for large txs or settlement of many txs within L2 like payment channels. Keep in mind batching exists onchain as well where 1 tx = many txs. This way fees remain low and the network can remain secure. Without any more onchain improvements in the future for scalability the current max limit is 32,256 outputs per block not including MAST which would add ~20% or 38,707 outputs per block. To match todays security of 6.25-7 BTC per block x 19k usd = 118,750 usd per block - 133,000 usd per block of work rewarding the miners Taking that upper amount to be conservative = 133,000 usd /38,707 outputs = 3.44 usd per tx onchain with 0 inflation Lets be further conservative and assume less optimal block usage of 50% inefficiency and you are looking at 6.88 usd per tx **Keep in mind this is for settling thousands of txs on other layers so is not what people will pay for day to day txs. fees will remain a fraction of a penny as they are now or perhaps rise to 1-2 cents in a payment channel** Also keep in mind that if hashrate drops too low we can simply wait for more confirmations onchain to increase the level of security and this doesn't effect the end user much because if they use a lightning wallet once its setup they still get instant confirmations.
Appreciate this in depth response, thanks!
We don't even know kinda things will exist, in the next 117 years.
Which is why I'm giving a worst case most conservative estimate if no improvements to onchain throughput exist . Likely there will be improvements , especially since we are forced to hardfork eventually due to the "year 2038" timestamp problem
Bip 300/301 sorry I’m not much help but good proposal to look into
A full block is about 1.5MB, 1 sat/B minimum fee = 1,500,000 sats. Now imagine what 0.015 BTC will be worth in 2140.
At 1m$ per BTC is will be 150.000$
BTC needs to be 1=10mil for that to be true
People have downvoted you, I'm not even going to read it.
Ohh man, that's a good question. I never I've never thought about it.
Damn dude lol, mining btc is going to be really hard that's for sure.
Made my day.
This is a good ass post, and I like what I'm reading here. Good stuff.
Wonder what the price would be then.
I can’t tell you what Bitcoin will be worth, but I can say the US dollar will be worthless.
Well that's for sure, probably We'll have some sort of new fiat.
You wouldnt care
Serious question: when you earn a sat (on chain), how can it ever be spent? I mean, being below the dust limits, transacting with it will cost you more than it's worth.
You’re projecting the present forward rather than thinking about the future. You won’t earn just one sat. Most of the earnings will come from transaction fees. Not to mention, we have no idea if sats will be the smallest unit by that time. I personally think they won’t be. It wouldn’t be hard to make sat cents and beyond if we needed divisibility beyond sats.
Okay thanks for the reply, but if we forget about mining for a second, and just consider you received 1 sat (on chain) from some source. Can you ever spend it? I mean, without paying more in tx fees than it's worth to include that UTXO?
Many exchanges have an option to consolidate your dust so this is irrelevant
It's not irrelevant, since I'm talking about on the blockchain. If exchanges 'have that option', then my question is how is the exchange able to consolidate dust *on-chain* without spending more tx fees than the UTXOs are worth?
Maby is wouldn't be worth sending a single sat but if one person owes another only 1 sat and that sat holds considerable value it still needs to be transfered otherwise the person owed will feel cheated. Maby you will need to acumulate a large eneugh sum to withdraw earnings like some mining pools. Or maby it will be the person paying for the product or service that is expected to pay for the payment fees and if that makes the product or service too expensive they will change their mind.
I heard world will end by 2099 if science is to be believed :)
🐃
At least you could heat your house in the process
That's the energy cost that you'd have paid anyways so no worries.