[ExI] Sell your Bitcoins!

[John Clark]

On Tue, May 19, 2026 at 11:49 AM Jason Resch via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

*> Even quantum cryptography would be dead if P = NP, because quantum
> cryptography is just a quantum key exchange. It still relies on classical
> encryption algorithms for protecting the bulk message. Though I suppose you
> could do a one time pad (OTP) encryption which would remain secure even if
> P = NP, but this requires you to send a key as long as the message to be
> encrypted, which may not be practical. You are right that there's probably
> no way to build a cryptocurrency on it. Quantum cryptography provides only
> a line that you can tell when it's tapped, but it provides no means of
> authentication or signatures, and crypto relies on a digital signature
> scheme.*
>

*I agree with all of that.  *


> *>> I agree that about 99.9% of Bitcoin's energy usage is caused by
>> bitcoin mining not managing bitcoin transactions, but that is irrelevant
>> because the two things are inextricably linked. You can't have one without
>> the other. *
>>
>
> *> You can, and that is the eventual plan. As the block rewards shrink
> towards zero,*
>

*It will never reach zero but because the block reward halves every four
years it will get asymptotically close to zero in 10 years or so.*

*> then mining decreases accordingly, eventually the block reward hits
> zero, and then the entire cost of the Bitcoin network will be for
> transaction fees,*
>

*True, therefore in addition to quantum computers that is ANOTHER huge
problem bitcoin is going to need to solve in the immediate future. Today
about 96% of a minor's income comes from block subsidies (the award of a
newly minted bitcoin) and only 4% from transaction fees; but that ratio is
going to need to be completely inverted. And that won't be easy. *


> * > which are small and less valuable compared to the block rewards. Then
> Bitcoin will use very little energy. *
>

*But there is a problem, the cost of a 51% attack is proportional to the
hash rate and that is proportional to how profitable mining is. So as block
subsidies decline mining becomes less profitable and that causes the hash
rate to drop and that causes the cost of a 51% attack to become
economically viable and that causes one individual to be able to engage in
double spending and that causes the complete destruction of any trust the
general public had in bitcoin. *

*That is an existential threat to bitcoin's existence even more certain
than the threat posed by quantum computers. *



> *>> Bitcoin's huge energy expenditure is used to solve silly hash
>> puzzles which are of no use to anyone and have nothing to do with the
>> transactions themselve, energy that AI could've used to increase the sum
>> total of human knowledge or doing something a little more useful than
>> solving a hash puzzle, like curing cancer.  **It's locked into the
>> fundamental nature of bitcoin that the more people value it the more energy
>> it consumes, but in 2008 I doubt if Satoshi considered the thermodynamics
>> consequences of his idea. *
>>
>
> *Have you considered that cryptocurrencies enable AI to become self
> sufficient entities, and they may be crucial to their emergence as a new
> kind of life?*
>

*No.*

*> It's basic supply & demand, if there were no longer demand for gold
> jewelry or for hoarding it in safes and vaults, then the price would
> decrease.*
>

*Not necessarily because in economics lots of things are non-linear. The
demand for the metallic element Rhodium is small but the supply of Rhodium
is even smaller, so it ends up being about three times as expensive as
Gold. *

*> Making bitcoins is not entirely useless, it can be life saving in
> certain situations.*
>

*Yeah I guess. Bitcoins are very useful if you want to pay a ransom to a
kidnapper, so I suppose you could say that in some circumstances it might
save a life.  *

*John K Clark*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20260520/98471a72/attachment-0001.htm>