If half of all miners were to switch to servicing AI workloads tomorrow, the Bitcoin network would simply reduce its computational requirements, argues Armstrong. The time required to produce new blocks would remain the same, while the system itself would continue operating normally and become more accessible to the miners who remained.
That's why, in Armstrong's view, the real driver of Bitcoin's price is not electricity costs but global fears of inflation.
Interesting point. The first one feels temporary.
The second one more durable. But hash power or energy going to Bitcoin mining doesn't determine its price (the network difficulty adjusts if miners go offline to keep the same pace of block mining). Long term, Bitcoin price is…
— Brian Armstrong (@brian_armstrong) July 20, 2026
As long as governments around the world continue increasing budget deficits and printing money, demand for a scarce digital asset will remain regardless of how many megawatts are used to mine it.
The discussion effectively expands on arguments Armstrong made a month earlier. In mid-June, amid a local market decline, he urged investors to look at the broader picture and published a chart of Bitcoin's four-year cycles, reminding them that rises and falls are a natural part of the asset's mechanics.
"Things are never as good or as bad as they seem. I am more bullish than ever and remain long," the Coinbase executive said at the time, suggesting that the cyclical bottom for the price of Bitcoin had already been reached near the $60,000 level.