Quote from: Peter R on June 21, 2015, 04:09:18 AM

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on June 21, 2015, 03:58:55 AM

Quote from: Peter R on June 21, 2015, 03:35:16 AM

to achieve the same security ignoring transaction fees. $8,000 / BTC is a very modest price if we assume this level of growth.

In 2032, how do you know $1 won't be worth a $0.01 in current purchasing power?

I think it was implied that I meant 2015 $s.

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on June 21, 2015, 03:58:55 AM

My point was never about absolute values but relative weight of transaction value versus debasement value. You entirely missed my point, as indicated below...

Quote from: Peter R on June 21, 2015, 03:35:16 AM

If there's 2,000 TPS in 2032, that's 1.2 million transactions per block...Any way you slice it, if we assume continued growth, the network security should be greater in 2032 than now.

The point of my logic was not about whether we would have network security, rather whether we would have decentralization.

Why do you always construct strawmen and lose the plot?

Your exact words:

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on June 21, 2015, 03:09:07 AM

Visa level right about when the debasement becomes so miniscule it has essentially stopped funding mining

I showed that the block subsidy would very likely not be "so minuscule it has essentially stopped funding mining."

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on June 21, 2015, 03:09:07 AM

...and the effect of block variance on delays due to nominal transaction fees will destroy any remaining decentralization Bitcoin.

^ I couldn't parse this statement.

Do you have a point?

"essentially stopped funding mining" means relative to transaction fees as pertains to the logic I presented that block size variance's effect on "transaction delays" due to fees will grow as transaction fees are relatively more of the nominal revenue relative to debasement by 2032.

Are you an engineer? You have very low reading comprehension. You are not able to apply the logic from a prior post to a subsequent one to understand the context.

You can still can't parse that last quote given the context?