/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>56347904
you did not heed my warning. you did not recognize the organic pullback and trend continuation. now you will only have yourself to blame as the line only keeps going up.

>>56123061
nice try CIAFBINSA

Here's to another green day for my oil & uranium frens. Kazatomprom up 4.69%(!) today, Cameco up 0.58% premarket and setting new high again. XOM slightly down premarket though

>>55541223

FUCK OFF

>29 pbtid

>>55101134
>that image

FUCK OFF DATAMINER GENOCIDE WHEN

NGEX chads... we're the new FILO now...

>>54126898
Sorry I lost all mine in a boating accident

>>54069788
no thx

>>53755901
No. Go away

>>53721089
I HATE THE ANTICHRIST

>>53666391
Glownigger

>>53386227
>how does the amount of bitcoin transactions, and the quantity of bitcoin in each transaction, affect the network?
Transactions take up space. Each block can only be a certain size. Each block can only happen about once every 15 (?) minutes. Therefore, blocks fill up and to get your transaction into a block you pay a competitive fee to the miners for each transaction.

Transaction size is affected by number of inputs and outputs, not by amount of Bitcoin. If you're sending from 2 addresses (inputs) to 2 other addresses (outputs), you're taking up twice as much space as if you sent from 1 address to 1 other address. It doesn't matter if those addresses and transactions are 0.001 BTC or 10,000 BTC. This is a bit of an oversimplification for measuring transaction size but it's close enough.

> HUGE amounts of bitcoin
Doesn't matter, see above
> HUGE amounts of wallets
Blocks would fill up, fees would go way up (including for the whales/attackers), transaction speed for those unwilling to compete would go way down
> Would miners make more money
Definitely if there was more fee competition
> lose money due to increases in electricity
Propagating, storing, verifying and selecting transactions are almost free by today's computation capabilities. Miners could even mine blocks with no transactions or select the ones they care about. So no, lots of transactions is easily mitigated from the miner's resources standpoint.
> Would the network significantly slow down?
It's already slow as fuck because the block size is small and transaction fees high. Someone making it worse just means it is more expensive to participate, but the throughput of transactions remains the same (shitty speed with full blocks).

>what defense against this exists? Would "bitcoin developers" have to do something to protect the network?
Look up "dust attack", but no, no real defense. It's working as intended from the point of view that it's going to be expensive for the whales.

More to come.

>>52458506

>>51614661
>asteroid mining
>gold synthesis
>ocean extraction
>Ugandan Wakanda mine
>(((Bloomberg)) experts

Hmmmm