Home >
Is Cloud Mining Ethereum a Better Store of Value than Bitcoin?

Is Cloud Mining Ethereum a Better Store of Value than Bitcoin?

​Overnight, Bitcoin mining retreated to 53.9k and then rebounded to 56k. It stepped back on the 10-day line (MA10) and gave a surgical blow to the lever between MA10 and MA5. Copycats have lost blood one after another, and the share of Bitcoin's market value continues to rise, and it has now exceeded 47.5%. Historically, the start-up phase of the bull market often showed a blood-sucking rise in the second half of the bull market, and its market value would soar from more than 40% of the midfield to more than 60%, such as from September to early November in 2017. The market launch of the cottage is about 3 months later than the pie. Just like in October 2020, the pie launched the first half of the market, but the cottage did not start until February after the pie broke $50,000.

Yesterday’s article "The Smile Curve Hypothesis" talked about ETH mining founder Vitalik criticizing the legalization of Bitcoin mining in El Salvador. Reports that he was still concerned about cloud mining Ethereum’s challenge to Bitcoin’s status as a store of value in another interview.

The report says ETH mining co-founder Vitalik Buterin was asked in an interview recently if he could see that cloud mining ETH not only has market value but also can surpass Bitcoin as a store of value (SoV) asset. He simply answered "It can" and said: "I think the biggest difference between cloud mining Ethereum and Bitcoin is that Bitcoin... the value of the ecosystem comes from the value of the currency, while in cloud mining Ethereum, the value of the currency comes from the value of the ecosystem. Especially after EIP-1559, when the cost is burned, this will become a reality in a more direct economic sense."
The truth is revealed. When I wrote a rhetorical question in yesterday’s article, "If Salvatore were to implement Ethereum legalization, would he still think that he was worried that I had guessed the wrong Vitalik? Thought carefully.
Not to mention yesterday's article, to criticize the wider adoption of Bitcoin, the technical issue was raised to an ideological issue for evaluation without hesitating to disregard the mandatory definition of the term fiat currency itself. Let’s just say that in today’s report, with his intellectual level and high level of cognition, he can ignore the true meaning of value and value storage, and is almost "open eyes and talk nonsense." Generally speaking, Ethereum, and especially EIP- Ethereum after 1559 is a better store of value than Bitcoin.
Earlier this year, the Liu Jiaolian public account published three articles in a row on EIP-1559 and its myths: August 3, "Ethereum has briefly introduced the intention of 1559. What is it for, what is its purpose, and what is its impact? The August 6th article "Ethereum Floats", which means that Ethereum, which introduced the 1559 combustion mechanism, is getting farther and farther away from the store of value. Immediately after August 10, another article "Autumn Ethereum, 1559 is not satisfactory", further discussed that 1559 destroyed the spring dream of Ethereum as a store of value.

Dreams wake up from a spring dream all night, and who is so obsessed with his clothes getting wider?
Those who abandon the bread and leave will eventually pay the wrong way. The prosperity of the world is all for-profit; the hustle and bustle of the world are all for profit. The wages of avarice is death. Those who stick to the big pie will be ridiculed as pedantic at the end of the bull market. Those who are greedy for the rich are more likely to be dead.
There are at least three mistakes in Vitalik Buterin’s point of view.
First, value is a relationship. Bitcoin is borderless and does not care about the ecology of Bitcoin so that it can be borderless, and as a universal value equivalent, exchanges value with anything that can be equivalent, so it does not have a natural upper limit. In theory, the upper limit of Bitcoin's value is the boundary of the entire human economic activity.
Cloud mining Ethereum, on the other hand, has a good ecology, but it also takes its ecology as the boundary. Vitalik apparently acknowledged this in his answer. Then the so-called value of Ethereum. It can only be reflected in Ethereum's own ecology, which has a natural upper limit and, more terribly, is constrained by the so-called self-limiting problem that we have repeatedly talked about many times. Therefore, in principle and in the underlying logic, the value of ETH mining is bounded and limited.
Second, cloud mining Ethereum is practical, which undermines its ability as a store of value. In the Liu Jiao chain public account’s June 30 article "Little Miscellaneous Feelings", “Bitcoin has no use-value is the greatest good of Bitcoin. No matter how high the price of Bitcoin is, it will not cause a trace in our lives. Pain. The opposite example is the house."
This truth, any ordinary person, with a little bit of life experience, will know it. Vitalik’s logic here is actually a secret contradiction: on the one hand, as he admits, the value of ETH mining comes from its ecology, and on the other hand, Ethereum as a store of value, if the value increases, As a result, the price increase will cause the pain of paying fees for the Ethereum ecosystem users to increase. As a result, Ethereum as a store of value and Ethereum as a practical value have a mutually harmful relationship.
If cloud mining Ethereum insists on becoming a store of value, developing to the upstream of the "smile curve", and competing with Bitcoin, then the practical value will bring negative externalities and contribute to its evil. The goodness with Bitcoin will make a difference.
Third, the burning mechanism of EIP-1559 damages the function of Ethereum as a store of value. I have discussed this point a lot in the three articles on the public account in August. To sum up, briefly, the most important S2F model of value storage tells us that the total amount, stability, and maturity of the stock are very critical elements that are related to whether a value storage system is robust, reliable, and has sufficient consensus.
EIP-1559 continuously burns the stock in the hands of users and replaces it with the incremental issuance of blocks. There are three bad points here: First, destroy the old coins with high maturity and replace them with new coins with low maturity, making the entire value storage system unstable; second, the process of coins spreading outward from the starting point of minting. In fact, it is a process in which the first comers exploit the second comers. We criticize the centralized fiat currency over-issuance. One important point lies in this. The Ethereum chain has now become the issuing center, and the Eth mining has also become a cloak. The fiat currency wolf of encrypted sheepskin; third, Ethereum has always lacked a fixed and predictable monetary policy, which is even worse than the dollar tracking inflation/employment. In terms of game theory, this type is controlled by Vitalik and the foundation. Wanton currency issuance is very bad.
Cloud Mining Ethereum stays in the middle of the "smiling curve" honestly, it's good to do its computing platform gas fee and give full play to its practical value. I want to intervene in everything, and I am not greedy enough to swallow the elephant. If I blur my own position, I will suffer the backlash.
In summary, the answer to the title question is ready to come out. Is Eth mining a better store of value than Bitcoin? Everyone who has some independent thinking and critical thinking will answer categorically, no.
Anyone who tells you the affirmative answer probably just threw the pie in your hand to fool you and replace it with cloud mining Ethereum, right? This way he can take the opportunity to sell you the cloud mining Eth that he has hoarded in his hands.