[Robotbeat]

You know what? That's a good point, and a problem with the Bitcoin end game. As Bitcoin mining gets harder and more of the value ends up entirely in the already-mined BTC, those with all this mining infrastructure are going to realize they can maximize this otherwise-stranded-asset by monopolizing mining power and developing a consensus to allow them to continue printing money.

"But transaction fees!" Okay, but if transaction fees go way up, that will encourage people to move away from BTC anyway or find some other way to reduce their exposure to transaction fees.

Once mining draws to a close, miners will consolidate. Just like in every other industry after a bust.

Cryptocurrencies are still, of course, very interesting and powerful.

[dithering]

Of course it's a good point, it's one of mine ;)

My expectation is we'll end up with "to avoid a hard cliff between a network reliant on mining and one reliant on transaction fees (and the inevitable instability of the transition), and to ensure a robust mining ecosystem, we're going to extend mining, at a reduced rate, for just a few more months..."

And there's an apparent benefit for end-users, too - if you want Bitcoin to be a practical payments mechanism (as opposed to store of value), transaction fees have to be kept comparable to credit cards. But the electricity used by the network still has to be paid for. What could be more tempting than magicing a few more bitcoin out of thin air to pay the miners?