817 karma · joined December 4, 2014
I can lease a new EV via my employer's salary sacrifice scheme. I can pay my lease payments from my pre-tax income. There is an additional tax due on cars leased this way in the UK called Benefit-in-Kind tax (BIK). The rate of this tax is fairly high for petrol/diesel cars but for EVs is currently near zero (based on 2% of the car's value).
The problem is that most of the major lease firms that operate these programs for employers only offer new vehicles. Ideally I would like a nearly-new EV. I have escalated and apparently our lease provider (Tusker) are looking at rolling this out in the first half of this year. I currently know of only one other lease firm that offers this option. I suspect is in the interest of lease firms to prop up the value of the used EV market, but this depends also on their margins on new vehicles. I wonder if it would make sense for the tax incentives for used Vs new EVs to be rejigged to avoid incentivising unnecessary new car production?
And, in the case of BERT, every token embedding after it too.
If network security cannot be maintained without sufficient inflation, then it surely it doesn't matter how philosophically wedded some users are to the 21m cap. It would lead to a hard fork, with two resulting coins:
1. An unchanged 'Capped-supply Bitcoin' 2. A new 'Permanent-subsidy Bitcoin'
Given a total breakdown in network security of the 'Capped-supply Bitcoin' (and its associated collapse in value), we would expect users to deem the, still secure and therefore higher value, 'Permanent-subsidy Bitcoin' to be the 'true' Bitcoin going forward, no?
This is, at the very least, debatable: https://www.onionfutures.com/essays/turning-off-bitcoins-inf...
But could Jamie Dimon still be right?
Well, if the network proves not to work without a sizable block subsidy, it could be hard forked, with the forked version of the source code not capping issuance at 21m coins. It's certainly one possible outcome...
As emissions drop, less money is spent on mining and a 51% attack becomes cheaper.
When China turned off mining, mining temporarily became more profitable as it took some time for miner spend to get back to a equilibrium state (where miners, in aggregate, spend nearly the entire block reward on mining costs).
It did temporarily get 'cheaper' to conduct a 51% attack (although it was still so expensive as to not be viable - due to the currently high block reward). This wasn't because of the difficulty adjustment though - that just maintained the average time to mine a block at 10 minutes.
Revisiting the catalogs from when I was a kid I am struck at both the small range of toys available (of which I can remember almost every one!) and the high prices...
The 8nm rumors have been widely reported[1] but at this point are just that, rumours.
[1] https://www.tweaktown.com/news/73592/nvidias-ampere-geforce-...