> The interesting part isn’t the loss per coin, it’s how long the lag between unprofitable mining and difficulty adjustment keeps forced selling pressure on the market.

I follow Bitcoin from a theoretical point of view and I find it fascinating.

Something that boggles my mind a lot is this: Bitcoin, which is somehow a bit "programmable", and Ethereum (which is definitely programmable) are basically the most correct computers on earth. Due to the consensus that needs to be reached by thousands+ of machines. Even if they're imperfect, ECC-less (for the most part), machines.

Now they may still run code with flaws: but they'll all run it exactly in the same way. If, say, a bit-flip occurs on a machine, that machine won't create a block or won't sign a transaction accepted by others. Not part of the consensus. That is wild.

Then the other thing which boggles my mind and which relates to your comment: the "selling pressure on the market" by Bitcoin miners is, no matter what they do, halved every four years. There were, 8 years ago, still 1800 Bitcoins mined per day. Today it's 450.

And in two years (we're midway before the next halving), it's going to be 225.

And Satoshi Nakamoto planned, from the very start.

Maybe it doesn't make sense (economically or from a security point of view: who's going to secure the network when there's not enough block reward anymore?).

But miners will mine 225 Bitcoins per day, not 450, in two years.

And that is totally fascinating.