BitCoin is a computational commodity
Hash-puzzles will subside in importance; data & computations efficiency will drive Node success/failure.
NOTE: This writing was updated today with a few more paragraphs, and some editing for clarity, along with some extra pictures of interest.-- May 18, 2021 (original May 15, 2021)
If you are technical you can simply watch Jack Davies, of nChain, presentation on how to push DATA into the BitCoin (SV) network using transaction scripts to understand how the BitCoin network will grow from being branded as "money" to being known as a a computational commodity. It's really simple. BitCoin Nodes like TAAL or Mempool MUST (emphasis important) by protocol store, verify, and track valid BitCoin UTXOs (Unspent Transaction Outputs-- the set of active coins which exist today) whether they like it or not. That's what a protocol is-- a set of rules. If the Nodes refuse to store and track the UTXOs which always have data  in them, then we don't have BitCoin at all because BitCoin is a protocol which DEFINES the commoditization of computation. By computation, it is meant calculations (or "CPU time"-- such as traditionally done by an Intel chip) and storage (data such as traditionally saved by a company like Micron/Sandisk).
...are simply handled by the BitCoin transaction format itself-- executed by the Nodes which together make up the entire BitCoin network. Let's define a few of the terms here by using a stock market analogy:
Nodes (like TAAL or Mempool) are something akin to all the big broker-dealer banks (Interactive Brokers, Jeffries, Cannacord, etc...)
The BitCoin protocol is like the rules of trading on the Nasdaq which all broker-dealers agree to abide.
The BitCoin Network itself is similar to what people colloquially call "Wall Street".
...of data is the saving of assets, of developers like SLictionary (definitions) or Streamanity (videos), and is sent via transactions to Nodes for long-term safekeeping (ie: using OP_PUSHDATA command in bitcoin scripting language) or ephemeral use ("unspendable" transactions). The ephemeral data might be kept for a short amount of time-- such as your personal stock trades or your ticket number for your single-ride subway trip downtown-- using methods like "OP_FALSE OP_RETURNs" outlined by nChain's Jack Davies in his video. The longer term data might be patents, copyrights, or family (trees) history-- also outlined by Davies using OP_PUSHDATA commands. It's unimportant if you know how the code works-- the terms above are simply being used to name the conventions of data-storage on-chain.
Contrast a computation commodity with a meaningless wealth-transfer game:
BTC does none of this, because it was disabled years ago-- immediately after Satoshi Nakamoto left the project in late 2010. In btc it is appropriate to use the term "miners". btc doesn't really have "Nodes" so much as they have "mining". Mining is the act of minting new coins from the protcol's 21 million issuance, as a TEMPORARY subsidy paid to transaction processors early in the network's lifespan. Unlike transaction fees, "mining" goes away over time. "Halvening" is the colloquial term for bitcon's pre-planned block subsidy reduction, and it means that about every 4 years the block subsidy halves on it's way to zero. Zero IS the final destination, as bitcoin is not infinite but bounded to 2.1 quadrillion satoshis. At some point far in the future the block subsidy will not only be meaningless, but will actually go away entirely as the issuance is fully complete with the block which issues the very last satoshi.
We are already, as of 2020, down to a block subsidy of 6.25 btc per block now, and in less than 20 years it will be closer to zero than a 1-btc reward. There is no point to btc as time goes by, but BSV Nodes will be a true "Game of Thrones" as processing DATA will become the only game in town.
Original BitCoin, now known as BitCoin Satoshi Vision because of communal gerrymandering, was always meant to be a computational commodity-- similar to standard-sized shipping containers or Manhattan land plots. It is not meant to change, by definition of "protocol". Protocols CAN change, but the beauty of them is that by NOT changing them we enable complexity to be built on top. In the streets of Manhattan, the roads grid sets the protocol for the land commoditization. If developers were allowed to erase streets, the city would cease to function efficiently, and cause people to move out as their businesses are rudely affected. Changing even the location of a subway station can radically alter all the plans by the many businessmen near the old and new stations-- this can have severe costs. A study of various eminent domain cases or reading Robert Moses's "Power Broker" will fill you in on how damaging changing protocols can be. Changing a protocol would require intense study and remuneration of those who are negatively affected by it-- very hard to do fairly.
Think about changing the "protocol" or rules of baseball. If something as simple as stadium sizes are changed, then baseball throws out one of it's greatest aspects-- records. Shorten a stadium and modern fans will quickly begin to not understand what made Babe Ruth great. Measurement is lost. The protocol of baseball isn't very important however, as giant businesses are unlikely to form on the foundation of baseball record-keeping (altho "Baseball Almanac" wouldn't be too happy). But changing things like the World Wide Web (www) internet protocol or the bitcoin protocol would cause massive amounts of waste and unfair damage to large businesses built on top. We will actually witness this effect in the 2020s when btc and other cryptocurrencies fail. Many jobs will be lost; much money will have been wasted; and, it's possible depressions and wars may be catalyzed from their demise.
It is NOT 100% that the original BitCoin protocol will work for it's intended purpose of commoditizing computation-- even Satoshi Nakamoto has admitted it's an "experiment". It's a venture not unlike changing shipping by introduction of standard container sizes. The market will be the ultimate judge of whether BSV is adopted. All we can do is study it and makes bets on whether it fulfills it's promise of making computation more efficient via commoditization. The results are already verified economically in something like shipping containers-- it's likely they save north of 80% via certain economic metrics (researched by myself via talking with stevedores who witnessed the transition during our lifetime). I can tell you also from experience that the rectangular schema of Manhattan or Philadelphia streets makes it far more efficient than lower Manhattan or Boston whos schemes were not protocoled. Get lost for the first time in lower Manhattan or the entirety of Boston and you'll quickly understand the power of commoditizing an asset like land.
Before we had coins to make measurement of gold, silver, nickel and copper easier for commercial "peer to peer cash" (sound familiar?) purposes, there was a long history of precious-metals usage for utility (king's crowns, silver-flaking chalices, silver spoons, gold rings etc...) and even trade (ie: talents of gold/silver). At some point, a Lydian electrum metalsmith changed all that by stamping and VERIFYING (sound familiar?) metals via coinage/minting. A commodity was born! A commoditization of a useful asset!
By the same token (pun intended), computation is already useful and we all know this after 70 years of computational history. Unlike the 1 troy ounce silver coin or Roman denarius (which would've been akin to our nickel or dime during the gold-standard-- itself equal to a cup of coffee, loaf of bread, or a gallon of gasoline prior to 1971), our current "cloud" computation hasn't been COMMODITIZED.. YET. There's been no agreed standard as competitors have siloed their offerings to increase margin. But private computation silos and worldwide computer networks don't mix. Networks required SPEED, SECURITY, CHEAPNESS, and BREADTH. You don't get to play a cheap, fast, fair game of uninterrupted Fortnite across the world without great gains in a network brought about by brutal competitive forces.
Competition is what BitCoin was built to foster. A transaction may contain an OP_PUSHDATA4 statement which allows upto 4 GigaBytes of data in a single transaction (container). The container itself can be as small as 1 satoshi, similar to a commoditized amount of storage-- that satoshi acting like a tick whose belly can be empty or stretched full. A ZST (zero-satoshi-transaction) represents no satoshis and thus has a relatively standard size at a couple hundred Bytes but can be priced according to speed and reliability and breadth-- like Amazon's EC2 product. Combined these commoditized offerings standardize computing for any (Node) providers who wish to compete on the protocol's level playing field. No more silos, walled gardens or exorbitant margins possible.
This difference in PURPOSE of BitCoin between BSV and btc is the very basis for why BitCoin Satoshi Vision (BSV) will be an energy efficient computational network and why btc "core" will be like betting on (un)green zero at a casino roulette wheel. btc HODLing is just buying and selling fiat tickets ultimately. Because of the necessity of rising transaction fees for btc to pay for the loss of halvening, dying block-subsidies btc isn't able to be used for payments, thus how does one book profit from owning it? btc MUST be redeemed for fiat. Thus btc is just an up and down roller-coaster ride but worse because the coaster operators don't even bother bringing those people back to the same spot they started. Riders will be left for dead, the operator will squeeze margined profit out of them, while burning the majority of it in electricity wasted on NOTHING. Whereas BSV will spend the majority of it's money on actual useful computation while blowing it's POW horn once every 10 minutes to signal all is well.
This is not investment advice, but it's the opinion of this author that any investments made in BSV, TAAL, or BSV startups should be long-term focused with the optionality of near-term rewards, and the humility of knowing the experiment is still in progress and will take longer than expected.
@EquityDiamonds on Medium for other Bitcoiny articles like this: https://equitydiamonds.medium.com/bitcoin-will-massively-reduce-the-computational-grids-electric-power-consumption-b88b0f52d33a
Follow @EquityDiamonds on Twitter for daily critical analysis on new events like this: