If the Bitcoin community adds any form of currency creation beyond the initial decreasing reward for securing transactions, I will sell all my Bitcoins and move on.
Price stability is a pipe dream of central planners. The larger Bitcoin becomes, the more stable it will become. If you have a good way to force people to use Bitcoin without forcing people to use Bitcoin, please share.
|
|
|
@rezin777 consider you working for their just 1 btc - building house for it in 2050, then we will talk Good that you joined network after 2 years of existence, but think what will happen if 'internet' will tell you about bitcoins in 2049? @goatpig - another senseless post i like current idea too, just post something more informative, constructive about 2 problems(why they are not problems here?) i posted or quit this topic : - ) Like I said, information is very valuable. Unfortunately for us, we don't live in a world where everyone has all the information about all things at all times. This is a silly argument. If everyone is getting an influenza vaccine, and I die of influenza because I live in the woods and never heard about an influenza vaccine, does that mean that influenza vaccines are unfair? No, it doesn't. You can choose to use the tool or not, crying that the people who found the tool first have an unfair advantage is ridiculous. Suggesting a voluntary currency is a Ponzi scheme is just as ridiculous.
|
|
|
I know a lot of early adopters will even kill if there is need just to get more people in the system and get price higher. Not that kind of things world have already seen. Let them be rich, but not 10% of the system money and NOT for nothing.
I like how BitterTea answered the early adopter argument. As far as early adopters unfairly benefiting, think about it this way...
Back when bitcoins had never traded above $0.06/BTC, what would you have said if someone suggested that you invest a couple thousand dollars into this currency, or infrastructure to support this currency? Most likely you would have called them insane. Today, that doesn't seem like such a bad idea now that we have a history of an uptrend.
Early adopters took large risks, and if bitcoin succeeds in becoming a widely adopted currency, will reap large rewards. I see absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Would you have though it was such a good idea then? Perhaps. Would you have invested in it? Maybe. The thing is, information is valuable (extremely valuable), and people with the proper information early on will reap the rewards. Am I jealous that they learned about Bitcoin before me? Yes, but I'm not complaining that a voluntary currency is a Ponzi scheme like some people. That's just silly.
|
|
|
Perhaps I should make it clear that I was being ironical. :-)
Oh. However, in nearly every news article about Bitcoin, you can read the word "drugs". That is ridiculous.
Indeed.
|
|
|
BTC Mine has this feature.
|
|
|
Also, I'm not a big fan of inflation (yes, I realize Bitcoin is currently inflating), so I wouldn't even bother with block chains with (long term) inflationary rules. Actually, bitcoins are presently gaining in value. That means they are deflating, not inflating. If I said price deflation or price inflation, maybe. But I was talking about actual inflation. Tomorrow there will be more Bitcoins in the economy than today, they are inflating. When you put more air in a balloon, the balloon is inflating.
|
|
|
I'm not from the USA.
The euro is next. Ah, assumptions, what would be the world without them?, I love how a little debate started from that, I'm not from Europe. The currency in whatever geographic area you're in isn't far behind either. Shit happens. Do you just let it happen to you? I buy umbrellas.
|
|
|
Help the community by attempting theft, fraud, blackmail and slander? Awesome idea! If you think drugs are bad, you should be helping people to get away from drugs, not preying on them.
|
|
|
Thank "random deity here" that people are interested in buying and selling Bitcoin.
|
|
|
I am curious to hear why you would or would not rather have one of these rulesets.
I would prefer Bitcoins be worth something. Every change you've suggested makes Bitcoins far, far easier to get and I imagine this would have a significant impact on the value. Also, I'm not a big fan of inflation (yes, I realize Bitcoin is currently inflating), so I wouldn't even bother with block chains with (long term) inflationary rules.
|
|
|
i dont believe in btcmine 0% fee.it can be just words isnt it
It's operated by donation. There is no mandatory fee. You can believe whatever you want, that doesn't make it true.
|
|
|
I'm going to invest in a massive worldwide education campaign to teach people the difference between your and you're!
|
|
|
Oh trust me, women won't have any problem getting Bitcoins at any price whenever they decide they want some.
|
|
|
the computers all with graphic card, I only want to use it for mining during idle time.
how much BTC is possilble to generate per day with this computing capability?
Since you give absolutely no specifics besides "10,000+ computers", I'd guess 3.
|
|
|
In before kiba sees bubble. Edit: Since I should add something useful to the post. I think you should read about Bitcoin, in your spare time, for a few weeks and decide for yourself. For me personally, Bitcoin is a no brainer. In my perfect scenario I own 1/3 Gold(Silver), 1/3 Land, 1/3 Bitcoin. I work hard and I get paid in Bitcoin and I spend Bitcoin to survive. I am not a fan of my money being manipulated by someone else. In that respect alone Bitcoin comes way out on top of our other options. I don't want to get political, but the current debt money system is the one that is unsustainable.
|
|
|
Even then, it still takes some time for difficulty to catch up because of how the difficulty-calculating algorithm works.
Good point. To show this in effect, notice that we just had a difficulty increase, yet we are still finding blocks faster than 6 per hour. (We are at around 10-11 per hour.) The difficulty adjusted to the average of the last period, but by the end of the period, we were above the average.
|
|
|
Difficulty quadripled, while price has stayed in the 6-9$ range.
Difficulty lags behind price. Here is what caused the difficulty quadrupling. When mining suddenly becomes insanely profitable, like it did then, it takes time for new hardware to hit the network (whether it be from newcomers seeing the amount of money to be made, or previous miners seeing the amount of money to be made). You don't just see the price go nuts, then turn on the extra 10 gpus you had sitting around doing nothing. You have to buy, wait for for shipping, assemble, configure, etc. And if you are a new miner, that takes even longer (because you have to post threads asking why your shit doesn't work). Then you have the people that hear from their friends that they are making "money for nothing" and they join in as well. Until eventually mining isn't insanely profitable anymore, it's merely profitable for those who are efficient, those who don't know/care if they are losing money, or those who don't pay for their hardware/electricity. I assume, if the price jumps again, there will be even more crazy difficulty jumps and the old miners will see these posts pop up again from all the new miners. And if the price does jump again, we won't see all the "mining, does it worth it?" threads for a few weeks because they lag behind the price as well!
|
|
|
I'm having great difficulty understanding you, but if I understand you correctly you're suggesting that the number of miners and traders is static, and that network hashrate is increasing only because miners are trading in their CPUs for GPUs, and then buying more and more GPUs. Is that correct?
Apparently they are buying Bitcoins from themselves as well.
|
|
|
mtgox trade volume (average) = const for 1.6 months (does NOT rise)
Look at the volume in dollars, not Bitcoins.
|
|
|
|