Blockstream CEO Adam Back: Declining Hashrate Increases Miner Profitability and Positive Cycle
Blockstream CEO Adam Back addressed concerns about mining companies shifting to AI computing power, noting that if Bitcoin's hashrate declines, the profit margins for remaining miners will actually expand: after marginal hashrate exits, the remaining miners will achieve higher profit margins, creating a balanced structure that aligns with AI computing returns.
He believes this process is essentially "hashrate arbitrage": when returns from other computing scenarios like AI are higher, inefficient miners exit first, allowing the remaining miners to earn higher returns in a less competitive hashrate environment. Higher profits can also support a positive cycle: miners reduce Bitcoin sales to cover electricity costs, and as the price of Bitcoin rises, profits are further solidified.
This view contrasts with some previous market analyses that worry that declining hashrate may weaken Bitcoin's security and network attractiveness. Back's logic emphasizes economic equilibrium and market self-regulation mechanisms rather than purely technical indicators.
Source: Public Information
ABAB AI Insight
The changes in hashrate and returns are not linear but are typical of "economic rebalancing." When part of the hashrate is drawn away by high-return scenarios like AI, the hashrate providers remaining in the network will experience "de-competition": at the same level of hashrate, they can earn more block rewards and transaction fees, thus raising marginal profit margins. This is similar to the profit recovery process of remaining producers after a contraction in supply in traditional resource markets.
From a capital behavior perspective, higher profits help reduce miners' pressure to "sell coins to pay for electricity." When the Bitcoin held by miners is no longer frequently sold to cover operating costs, the market's selling pressure structure will change, potentially creating positive feedback for the price. At the same time, the marginal exit process of hashrate will gradually converge until the return gap between mining and AI approaches balance.
However, from a broader structural perspective, this "economic equilibrium" does not change the fundamental constraints of Bitcoin's security model: network security relies on continuous hashrate investment, and hashrate supply is determined by external computing market returns. If AI maintains higher unit returns in the long term, Bitcoin's hashrate will have to continuously rely on higher prices or higher fee levels to maintain its attractiveness. This means its security costs are deeply tied to price fluctuations rather than being entirely endogenous.
Therefore, Back's perspective emphasizes short-term economic dynamics, while the long-term still faces a question: as the total global hashrate continues to concentrate towards AI, can Bitcoin maintain a sufficient and decentralized hashrate base without relying on continuous monetary premium support?