From that atomic unit, one could understand the network as being composed of 21x10^N of such units. In this sense, creating further divisions and increasing N has the same effect of devaluing the currency.
It's a matter of point of view, and points of view can change over time.
No, no it doesn't. It makes it more divisible. It doesn't devalue it what-so-ever. You will have more, less valuable pieces, but the whole is the same value. It's not a matter of point of view, it's a misunderstanding. Making something more divisible does not dilute it, it simply allows you to possess smaller pieces. It does not increase the total amount. Your theory applies to things made of atoms. The real use of a pie is serving as food. Half a pie is 50% as useful as a whole pie, so half a pie is worth half a whole pie and this is an immutable fact. I am not so sure about that with mathematical abstractions such as Bitcoins, because here what really matters isn't the value of a single coin, but how much monetary value can be represented by the whole network. The value of a single coin is a consequence. Whether we have 21, 21 million or 21 gazillion coins is irrelevant. The value of a single unit will be how the market values the whole network, divided by the number of units. What I am tending to agree here is that our real accounting unit is not the Bitcoin, but the satoshi. Adding further decimals will probably have the same effect as creating more coins. Maybe this is not an immediate effect, but the market could adjust itself. My point exactly. Bitcoins are a conceit for the sake of marketing Bitcoin. It's 21 million ledger units, its 2.1 quadrillion with the already discussed possibility of expanding that. Revans, if everyone is screaming stupid at you for bringing a disruptive idea, odds are you are damn right. I agree that adding further decimals will likely have unexpected results. People shouldn't take the gold vs Bitcoin comparison too far. |
|
|
|
From that atomic unit, one could understand the network as being composed of 21x10^N of such units. In this sense, creating further divisions and increasing N has the same effect of devaluing the currency.
It's a matter of point of view, and points of view can change over time.
No, no it doesn't. It makes it more divisible. It doesn't devalue it what-so-ever. You will have more, less valuable pieces, but the whole is the same value. It's not a matter of point of view, it's a misunderstanding. Making something more divisible does not dilute it, it simply allows you to possess smaller pieces. It does not increase the total amount. Your theory applies to things made of atoms. The real use of a pie is serving as food. Half a pie is 50% as useful as a whole pie, so half a pie is worth half a whole pie and this is an immutable fact. I am not so sure about that with mathematical abstractions such as Bitcoins, because here what really matters isn't the value of a single coin, but how much monetary value can be represented by the whole network. The value of a single coin is a consequence. Whether we have 21, 21 million or 21 gazillion coins is irrelevant. The value of a single unit will be how the market values the whole network, divided by the number of units. What I am tending to agree here is that our real accounting unit is not the Bitcoin, but the satoshi. Adding further decimals will probably have the same effect as creating more coins. Maybe this is not an immediate effect, but the market could adjust itself. |
|
|
|
The dumbness is strong with this one.
Let me explain, as you clearly aren't smart enogh to grasp the idea yourself.
Bitcoin cultists talk of individual Bitcoins being worth hundreds of thousands of dollars eventually, which would mean very few people would ever own a whole Bitcoin and so would see their Bitcoin wealth expressed as sub units of a Bitcoin. Now let's say that it is decided that instead of 100M, that a bitcoin can now be divided into 1 billion sub units. As a result those people who hold any number of whole Bitcoins can buy 10x as much Bitcoin wealth from those who only have Bitcoin fractions.
You have a whole pie. It's cut into 4 slices. I have half a pie. It's cut the same as yours, so I have 2 slices. We decide that instead of 4 slices per pie, we are going to cut them smaller and make 8 slices per pie. You have a whole pie. It's cut into 8 slices. I have half a pie. It's cut the same as yours, so I have 4 slices. What are you on about? We both still have the same fucking amount of pie! Excellent. Now explain to me how the US Dollar is debased compared to Bitcoin on this basis. I already did earlier in this thread. The Fed is making new pies out of thin air and selling them to the market for full price. After they've sold, there is more pie available and your pie is worth less. With the bitcoin example, we both have the same amount of pie relative to the total amount of pie. We can just use smaller slices. With the dollar example, we both have less pie relative to the total amount of pie. It doesn't much matter how we slice it, we lost value. But that isn't true at all is it? Bitcoin is heavily marketed on the basis of 21 million total units, how do you think the market will react one trades start taking place in fractions of a Bitcoin? Or how about when the number sub units allowed is increased? Like I said if the Fed invented a superdollar worth 1 million or 1 billion dollars, would that allay the criticism? If not, why not? Yes, but I am wondering if we aren't gradually migrating to a world where the satoshi is the common accounting unit, with "one Bitcoin" becoming less and less relevant for real operations. If Bitcoin really skyrockets, it'll make much more sense to think day to day operations in terms of the smallest available division, whose values will be comparable to the dollar. From that atomic unit, one could understand the network as being composed of 21x10^N of such units. In this sense, creating further divisions and increasing N has the same effect of devaluing the currency. It's a matter of point of view, and points of view can change over time. |
|
|
|
|
The problem is, everyone agrees that half a pie will satisfy only half of your hunger.
Bitcoin, however, is totally abstract, it's mathematics. The division is, thus, arbitrary. In the long term, adding more decimals will really make people wonder how many "accounting units" are in the system: if the original 21 million or the actual number of satoshis.
Please note I am all bullish on Bitcoin but the thesis that adding more decimals can lead to a flash crash should not be rapidly dismissed.
|
|
|
|
Apologies for the lack of dividend last Sunday. Unfortunately I ran out of time before my honeymoon.
I will be sending last week's dividend soon (currently sight seeing in Bali, so when we get back to the hotel this evening) and will send the regular one on Sunday.
This will be the first proper payment with the BTC dividend script. I'm making it exactly 3.0 BTC so you should all be able to work out what you should get:
<number-of-bond-shares> x 3.0 / 100,000
Please let me know in this thread if you don't get what you expect.
After that I'm going to have to delay the next two dividends (ie. 3rd & 10th of November) and will pay them with the dividend on the 17th. I decided it would be better to do this rather than try to teach one of the guys while I'm away.
Kate.
Problem with delaying dividends in this case is that they depend on EUR rates against BTC, and these have been varying wildly. If you pay with today's EUR/BTC rates, bondholders will end up with less BTC than they would last Sunday. If the bondholder's intention was to keep their BTC, they will have lost money. On the other hand, if the bondholder meant to convert back to EUR and EUR appreciated against BTC, they will also have lost money upon conversion. I can imagine unforeseen circumstances forcing a delay but you must realize it causes unnecessary problems to investors and restricts their ability of deciding how to keep their earnings. In my opinion, if you must absolutely delay payment you should take the most favorable rate in account - from the day it was supposed to be paid and from when it was actually paid. |
|
|
|
|
If you go to CM's topic on litecoin.net, you'll see the custom utility was used to pay CM's dividends, but the bond was forgotten. Apparently Kate is on a honeymoon trip but this is no excuse.
Also I wonder what we'll get in BTC when she finally pays since BTC has appreciated considerably against EUR since Sunday.
|
|
|
|
|
Does anyone know if dividends been paid last Sunday?
|
|
|
|
Hello everyone,
As someone holding FIMB shares on BTCT.CO I thought of coming here and ask why no dividends have been paid in October. Has Garrett made any announcement regarding this issue?
So there is no answer to this? I see it a rather serious situation as technically Garrett is on default and investors don't seem to care. Even if you don't have FIMB shares but are holding Cognitive shares this should be of concern to you. Garrett, can you give some explanation please? Hey, Now that trading is halted, dividends will be paid manually to those who have submitted their BTC address to BTC-TC. If you have not done this, I have sent you an email stating that dividends will go out only to those who have submitted an address started November 1, and October divs are being delayed until the 15th to allow fair time to submit BTC addresses, so as to ensure no btc are stuck in BTC-TC after the closure. I am currently working on a plan to migrate seamlessly to another trading platform. There should be very little grief involved in the process. Cheers, Garrett Hi, are dividends coming today? Will you make an announcement regarding this? |
|
|
|
Hello everyone,
As someone holding FIMB shares on BTCT.CO I thought of coming here and ask why no dividends have been paid in October. Has Garrett made any announcement regarding this issue?
So there is no answer to this? I see it a rather serious situation as technically Garrett is on default and investors don't seem to care. Even if you don't have FIMB shares but are holding Cognitive shares this should be of concern to you. Garrett, can you give some explanation please? Hey, Now that trading is halted, dividends will be paid manually to those who have submitted their BTC address to BTC-TC. If you have not done this, I have sent you an email stating that dividends will go out only to those who have submitted an address started November 1, and October divs are being delayed until the 15th to allow fair time to submit BTC addresses, so as to ensure no btc are stuck in BTC-TC after the closure. I am currently working on a plan to migrate seamlessly to another trading platform. There should be very little grief involved in the process. Cheers, Garrett I didn't receive such email but might have overlooked it. Anyways I've already set the withdrawal address, thank you for informing it'll be paid on the 15th. |
|
|
|
Hello everyone,
As someone holding FIMB shares on BTCT.CO I thought of coming here and ask why no dividends have been paid in October. Has Garrett made any announcement regarding this issue?
So there is no answer to this? I see it a rather serious situation as technically Garrett is on default and investors don't seem to care. Even if you don't have FIMB shares but are holding Cognitive shares this should be of concern to you. Garrett, can you give some explanation please? |
|
|
|
|
Hello everyone,
As someone holding FIMB shares on BTCT.CO I thought of coming here and ask why no dividends have been paid in October. Has Garrett made any announcement regarding this issue?
|
|
|
|
25 posts is a lot. I only created this account to ask one question there...
post your question here and I'll link your post there Thank you very much. Can you please ask on Cognitive's thread why the issuer (Garret) hasn't payed October's dividends for the FIMB bond. He was supposed to pay on the beginning of each month but looks like he's very delayed and some explanation would be very welcomed. |
|
|
|
|
What is a legitimate post?
|
|
|
|
|
25 posts is a lot. I only created this account to ask one question there...
|
|
|
|
|
Does anyone know what is necessary to be able to post on the Securities subforum?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
