Bitcoin Forum

It suddenly struck me that Bitcoin infinite divisibility (which Bitcoin fanboys often brag about) has virtually the same effect as the fiat unlimited supply in respect to making the rich even richer while the poor poorer in the long run...

Let's assume that Bitcoin has become the universal currency for the sake of simplicity

People who brag about "infinite divisibility" don't know anything about computer software (thus they can be safely ignored). Computers can't do anything infinitely apart from "loop" (which is often what people might refer to as seeing an application "freeze").

It would be possible to extend Bitcoin's divisibility but that would still be "finite" (and in fact it could be extended by a few extra decimals without even changing the 64 bit data type).

If satoshis really became valuable in the far future (and not just considered as dust) then perhaps this would happen, however, I very much doubt this is going to happen in the near future.

(this post is to just clarify that "infinite" is the wrong word to be using)

I guess you are not quite correct about this. You can extend Bitcoin's divisibility both up and down (actually, left and right). And if there is a technical limit to extend it to the right (i.e. by adding more decimal places), there is no limit to extending it to the left, (i.e. by denominating Bitcoin). The latter means that instead of 21M Bitcoins you will have, for example, 21M mBitcoins...

Thereby, you are essentially adding three additional decimal places

Again - that does not make anything "infinite" which was the point of my post (please don't ignore the point and go off on a tangent).

If you're not interested in having meaningful technical discussion in your topic then I'll simply refrain from posting in it.

Okay, since I primarily intended it to be an economic discussion about infinite (or quite close to) divisibility of Bitcoin versus unlimited (well, not totally unlimited) supply of fiat (i.e. technical issues aside)...

So, in a sense, it was you who went off "on a tangent"

Fine - but it is rather silly to even have a discussion about a technical impossibility (such as "infinite xxx").

In any case I'll now leave this topic for those that aren't interested in reality and technical limitations.

The technical impossibility you are talking about is equally applicable to both infinite divisibility and unlimited supply, so it is irrelevant to the matter in question, even if it is valid per se. Regarding software, state-of-the-art databases allow you to create numeric types with arbitrary precision. For example, Postgres DBMS allows precision of over 16,000 digits after (https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.2/static/datatype-numeric.html) the decimal point (yes, you read it right, sixteen thousand decimal places). And there is no particular difficulty to change this limit to the upside...

But as you got it, this is totally off-topic here

That is right. I think the bitcoin will win in the long term against the fiat as it has limited supply and will increase in value.

It has limited supply, but infinite divisibility renders this irrelevant. So, in a sense, its supply is virtually not limited either. That's the point of this topic. Apart from that, gold had also limited supply, but did it win in the end?

Or the end has yet to come?

And yet infinite divisibility is a technical impossibility thus rendering this whole topic pointless. :D

(am really not going to reply again but just couldn't help correcting a nonsensical statement)

(hint: there is no computer that can count to infinity and there never will be)

You are nitpicking which is even worse than infinite divisibility impossibility. If that somehow makes you less restless (or more restful, lol), think about infinite divisibility from a mathematical point of view

It needn't count to infinity, it can just divide a number by zero to get right there. And yes, it is allowed (namely, division by zero). You may want to learn more about inf (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_by_zero#Computer_arithmetic)

If we were talking about pure maths and not computer software then that idea might have some purpose. But if you are wanting to refer in any realistic way to Bitcoin (which is computer software not pure math) then you simply can't use such nonsense.

And - "divide by zero" is an ERROR in any computer. (you clearly don't even know the most basic things about computers and software).

You should find something other than Bitcoin to base your "infinite divisibility" case on but I don't think anyone is going to care as that is not software and therefore can't actually be used.

You seem to have got stuck in 80s (when there were no fpu's in personal computers). Division by zero has a well-defined result and it is NOT an error. As you might have guessed, the result is inf, either negative or positive...


Taken from an IEEE floating-point standard

You are talking about IEEE floating point - which Bitcoin does not use (but which was created in the 1980's).

Try not to be insulting and please read this: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8031354/what-is-the-result-of-divide-by-zero

Let me quote the most relevant part:


Now - let's see if you can tell me how Bitcoin numerical values are represented?

Even if Bitcoin doesn't use floating point arithmetic (I don't really know), this doesn't in the least invalidate the whole point, since it is you who started talking about "divide by zero is an ERROR in any computer" (without any connection to Bitcoin), plain and simple...

Which now turns out to be true only for integer arithmetic, right?

It really doesn't help at all to "divide by zero" as that is not "infinite divisibility" (you're now the one trying to nitpick one useless edge case with IEEE floating point numbers that are not used by Bitcoin).

If your point is not to talk about Bitcoin then please remove the Bitcoin references in your OP (and instead insert some "useless pure math" concept).

When the discussion is starting from the point of "let's assume their are unicorns" it isn't really a very useful discussion in regards to actual practical things like Bitcoin.

Well, bitcoin is not the solution to end poverty, it never was, I think it is pretty obvious who has benefited and is going to continue to benefit from this system, high educated first world males, the richer the better.

But it is enough to reveal that it is actually you who "clearly don't even know the most basic things about computers and software", right? Though I don't care much (you may go away if you please), since this is not what I meant to discuss here, certainly not the case of integer division vs floating point division (related to Bitcoin or not, lol)...

After all, it is your problem to get away with

Actually no - you have made the fool out of yourself which is why no-one else is interested in your nonsense topic.

Enough of troll feeding - I'm spraying some "troll begone" on you now and really leaving this retarded topic "to the retards".

:D

(nothing worse than a "smartass" who is actually a "dumbass")

Good riddance

I agree with that. The bitcoin is just help the poor so that their wealth will not be inflated away by the fiat.

You did not elaborate, of exactly how infinite divisibility makes the "rich even richer" and the "poor poorer" in "the long run". I doubt that your argument is really valid, because in contrast to owning fiat money with virtually unlimited supply, owning Bitcoin is not subject to inflationary devaluation. The opposite is true: With increasing Bitcoin use, the purchasing power of the same amount of Bitcoin owned will likely increase since the total number of Bitcoin is fixed. Divisibility is a necessity to make payments feasible in the context of increasing buying power - it does in no way reduce the value of one's holdings.

Bitcoin was not introduced to make socialist's pipe dreams a reality. Bitcoin won't change human behavior. It's a simple fact that most people can't exercise delay of gratification - these people live beyond their means and will never become rich. However even for those people Bitcoin is in fact advantageous, since it takes away inflationary devaluation.

ya.ya.yo!

Indeed, you are entitled to think that my point is not valid. Some morons even discard the whole idea of infinite divisibility as being nonsensical and meaningless altogether without ever realizing that this is no more than a catchy metaphor, a convenient figure of speech, lol. But let's return to our muttons now. Do you agree that unlimited fiat supply makes the rich richer and the poor poorer, and clearly understand how that happens?

Without understanding this you won't be able to fully grasp why my point is in fact valid in respect to Bitcoin as well