Quote from: pooya87 on January 30, 2025, 04:58:51 AM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on January 29, 2025, 04:01:21 AM

But higher level of popularity = more network effects, more network effects = higher possibility of retaining long term value, LIKE Bitcoin.

Not like bitcoin though. Because it is trivial to create another useless memcoin and replace the old one or at least take its market share than it is to create another useful payment system like Bitcoin.

The point is, for a merge mine to work to sustain the long term profitability of the miners, the merge mined coin itself MUST also be valued by both miners and users.

Quote

Quote from: Wind_FURY on January 29, 2025, 04:01:21 AM

I believe, if it was possible, a merge mine with Monero would be the best possible choice for Bitcoin.

Merge mining works best with weaker projects that cannot stay alive and secure alone (due to lack of interest) and need another bigger project to stick to and stay alive with its help. Monero isn't like that, it has been capable of attracting enough interest on its own to stay alive and secure so far.

It's possible that that's what Bitcoin will probably be if the miners aren't incentivized to continue providing security for the network, no?

🤔

Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on January 30, 2025, 09:45:34 AM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on January 29, 2025, 04:01:21 AM

I believe, if it was possible, a merge mine with Monero would be the best possible choice for Bitcoin.

It's not possible, because their mining algorithms are completely different. Monero uses RandomX, which is incompatible with ASIC miners. It is also realistically infeasible to create a Monero ASIC, as it would require making a better general-purpose CPU than those of Intel and AMD, both of which are worth hundreds of billions, because they specialize in researching and optimizing CPU performance.

Ser, please, kindly, and respectfully, get the context of the post before you reply.