Will Bitcoin Rely on Fees Alone After 2140?

20 replies 385 views
Posts: 20 · Reputation: 29
#1Jul 14, 2017, 08:53 PM
We often chat about Bitcoin's 21 million cap, but what happens after 2140? The block subsidy will hit zero then, and miners will rely solely on transaction fees for income. That was part of Satoshi's plan, but is it really gonna work in practice? Can fees secure the network?
3 Reply Quote Share
CalmMinerFull Member
Posts: 554 · Reputation: 784
#2Jul 16, 2017, 05:04 PM
Honestly, this question has popped up a ton here. But yeah, search for it next time. Still, it’s a concern for the future, and I doubt any of us will be around to see the last Bitcoin mined. Kind of like those quantum computing fears... let’s not stress about it yet.
0 Reply Quote Share
ColdGangMember
Posts: 152 · Reputation: 183
#3Jul 16, 2017, 11:00 PM
Mining is already sketchy in terms of profit, honestly. I mean, we’ll figure it out when we get there. But if I had to guess, we might see a drop in the number of active miners.
4 Reply Quote Share
diamond_minerFull Member
Posts: 138 · Reputation: 623
#4Jul 17, 2017, 04:16 AM
It’s kinda sad... 2140 is like 114 years away. Most of us here won’t even be alive. Crazy to think about.
1 Reply Quote Share
CalmMinerFull Member
Posts: 554 · Reputation: 784
#5Jul 17, 2017, 06:21 AM
Right? Why worry now? Did anyone even foresee Bitcoin 100 years ago? No way! We have no clue what’s gonna happen, but we can speculate about fees being enough in the next 25 years.
2 Reply Quote Share
WildWolfMember
Posts: 168 · Reputation: 43
#6Jul 17, 2017, 08:59 AM
Bitcoin’s been around for about 17 years, and look how much it changed. With all the forks and adaptations, if it can't stand on fees alone, then something’s gotta give.
4 Reply Quote Share
wizard_2016Full Member
Posts: 127 · Reputation: 575
#7Jul 18, 2017, 07:06 PM
Mining should still be profitable as long as there are transaction fees. But the real deal is whether those fees can keep Bitcoin safe from a 51% attack, and no one has a solid answer for that.
2 Reply Quote Share
markbossNewbie
Posts: 2 · Reputation: 27
#8Jul 19, 2017, 07:07 AM
Totally agree. Bitcoin’s been around for 17 years, and that future you're talking about is still a long way off. If demand grows, transaction fees could rise too, helping miners out.
4 Reply Quote Share
Posts: 32 · Reputation: 237
#9Jul 19, 2017, 01:57 PM
2140 is kinda irrelevant here. Even with low fees, a full block can earn about 0.02 BTC in fees. By 2056, the block subsidy will drop below that. We’re talking 30 years, not 114.
1 Reply Quote Share
0xNodeMember
Posts: 671 · Reputation: 80
#10Jul 19, 2017, 03:01 PM
Exactly! We don't need to wait until 2140 to see if this becomes a problem. Issues will start showing up way before that if they’re serious.
3 Reply Quote Share
CalmMinerFull Member
Posts: 554 · Reputation: 784
#11Jul 19, 2017, 03:21 PM
It's tough to say for sure, but it all comes down to how the network or miners will react when fees are their only motivation. It’s about how high transaction volumes are.
6 Reply Quote Share
Posts: 110 · Reputation: 19
#12Jul 19, 2017, 08:48 PM
You can see the situation now. BCH's block rewards from inflation and fees are almost equal to Bitcoin's fee income. Not what they meant when they claimed to be the future of Bitcoin.
4 Reply Quote Share
dave.forkMember
Posts: 375 · Reputation: 185
#13Jul 20, 2017, 12:13 AM
This has been brought up before. Can you guys share your thoughts on what level of security we need?
1 Reply Quote Share
pr0to88Member
Posts: 1222 · Reputation: 235
#14Jul 20, 2017, 02:19 AM
Satoshi mentioned 20 years from 2010, so that’s 2030. By then, we’ll see if fees can cover the subsidy drops.
3 Reply Quote Share
Posts: 20 · Reputation: 29
#15Jul 20, 2017, 02:59 AM
I hope I live to see 2040. Satoshi thought the fee market would kick in by 2030, not 2140. If fees can’t replace the subsidy by 2036, we might see hashpower drop.
4 Reply Quote Share
dave.forkMember
Posts: 375 · Reputation: 185
#16Jul 20, 2017, 04:51 AM
The risk of a 51% attack isn’t just about who owns the infrastructure. It's more about someone temporarily accessing the rigs. Renting hash power could be the real risk here.
2 Reply Quote Share
Posts: 20 · Reputation: 29
#17Jul 20, 2017, 08:36 AM
Now I see it. The block subsidy running out doesn’t just cut the security budget; it alters how hashpower works. If miners rely on rented power, Bitcoin's security becomes tied to rental prices, not its own.
4 Reply Quote Share
0xNodeMember
Posts: 671 · Reputation: 80
#18Jul 20, 2017, 11:26 AM
You guys gotta stop thinking in black and white. Just because security drops doesn’t mean it’s suddenly unsafe. It's all about relative measures.
1 Reply Quote Share
dave.forkMember
Posts: 375 · Reputation: 185
#19Jul 22, 2017, 03:42 PM
What measures are you suggesting? Where would these be introduced? Bitcoin’s game theory assumes most of the hash power stays honest.
2 Reply Quote Share
MadNovaHero Member
Posts: 278 · Reputation: 3536
#20Jul 22, 2017, 09:03 PM
It’s wild that we might not see Bitcoin thrive after all the blocks are mined. But if Bitcoin makes it a century from now, I doubt fees will be an issue.
0 Reply Quote Share

Related topics