This is just absurd. And this thread is non-sense. Transaction fees will be enough to guarantee mining activity. If you don't agree or if you believe differently, then don't use bitcoin, and stop writing such useless/irrational things. Absurd.... Or... Genius?  Sweft's Law: The network hashrate of a cryptocurrency must rise at a rate at least equal to that of the rate of Moore's Law to ensure minimum network security. You have written this already 2 years ago, and in all that time you still don't see how this is utter rubbish? This still makes perfect sense to you, doesn't it? Amazing... No, it makes perfect sense, especially considering Sweft's Law and diminishing mining profit. |
|
|
|
|
I will introduce a law which i believe is the fundamental law of securing the network of a cryptocurrency. This law will be known as Sweft's Law and is described below.
Sweft's Law: The network hashrate of a cryptocurrency must rise at a rate at least equal to that of the rate of Moore's Law to ensure minimum network security.
|
|
|
|
That's why the price goes up, in accordance to network hash, which secures the network. I don't believe you. Miners don't think, "Hey let's secure this worthless coin so the value goes up and people will buy it from us." Miners think, "Hey, people are buying this valuable coin, lets get paid for securing the network." If all it took to make a coin valuable was hashing power, all of the alt coins would be wildly successful as well. Coins which can be merged mined would be as valuable as Bitcoin. Yet they aren't. Why not? Because difficulty doesn't drive price. This can all be prevented with an inflationary cryptocurrency. I'm not a programmer so i don't really know how to develope an inflationary alt coin, but if i knew, surely i would.
Inflationary coins exist already. Enjoy. BTC is worth ZERO without a secure network. Does hash secure the network? Yes. Does a more secure network increase demand? Yes. Does increase demand drive prices up? Yes. There are various reasons why other alt currencies are valueless. They can be undervalued. The distributions of coins might make it less attractive. They may not have the developer ability bitcoin has. First and foremost, though, before any other factors are considered in price, the strength (hash) of the network must be considered. |
|
|
|
When more bitcoins are lost than created, reaching the 'Sweft point', bitcoin will become deflationary.
Somewhere around the 'Sweft point' bitcoins value will approach 0 and become worthless.
This can all be prevented with an inflationary cryptocurrency. I'm not a programmer so i don't really know how to develope an inflationary alt coin, but if i knew, surely i would.
This is just absurd. And this thread is non-sense. Transaction fees will be enough to guarantee mining activity. If you don't agree or if you believe differently, then don't use bitcoin, and stop writing such useless/irrational things. The guarantee of mining activity is irrelevant. If you read my posts you would understand that mining must continuously increase to secure the network. If hash doesn't keep up with Moore's Law then the network will be prone to attack. |
|
|
|
I agree with the many suggestions to go create your own alt coin and not to use Bitcoin.
Do you often spend time on forums of technology that you do not wish to ever use to tell them why their technology is flawed?
Does Litecoin have a forum? Have you critiqued them yet?
I was a GPU miner of bitcoin, which is no longer economically feasible. I'm trying to educate people on these forums so that we can produce a cryptocurrency that will be resilient. What people don't realize is that bitcoin is currently inflationary. That's why the price goes up, in accordance to network hash, which secures the network. When more bitcoins are lost than created, reaching the 'Sweft point', bitcoin will become deflationary. Somewhere around the 'Sweft point' bitcoins value will approach 0 and become worthless. This can all be prevented with an inflationary cryptocurrency. I'm not a programmer so i don't really know how to develope an inflationary alt coin, but if i knew, surely i would. |
|
|
|
Well we shall see I guess. Let us know when our constant minting coins reach 3% so we can watch the transition to the point at which your modification will be needed to keep them at the top of the heap.
Meanwhile its not clear people are even seeing the value in just the never decreasing minting, maybe you need to push that so people catch on to it first, if you can do that maybe they will then be prepared to believe it should also be modified when it reaches this magical 3%.
By the way, have you graphed how the usefulness / adoption / value / anything changes at 2.9%, 3.1%, 2.99%, 3.01% and so on to prove 3% is truly the peak point?
-MarkM-
The problem is that I don't understand why Satoshi designed the protocol to be deflationary. Gold has been mined for 7000 years. The amount of gold in the universe is almost infinite. Most people accept that gold is a store of value. For BTC to be almost fully mined in almost 20 years means that early adopters have a huge advantage that is unlike any commodity on earth. Every year more gold is discovered yet hardly anybody would claim that gold was inflationary. In fact, most people claim that gold protects against inflation. Why? Because it takes work to produce gold, just like it does to mine bitcoins. If all the gold on earth was mined in 20 years, gold would be valueless. |
|
|
|
Make an alt currency with a cap minimum 3% inflation. This will satisfy the profits of the miners and hash of the network.
Wow... please just go and do this, and don't bother your pretty little head about bitcoin ever again. It's truly staggering how little you understand, and how utterly unaware you are of your lack of understanding. But seriously, please go design your alt-chain, I wish you luck with it. At least two altcoins already keep issuing the same number of coins per block forever, which is a big step in the "desired" direction, so how about go promote those for now as the best so far and maybe as you become a major investor in those their makers might listen to your arguments that even that is not enough and a coin must be made that increases the nubmer of coins issued per block... -MarkM- I don't believe that will provide the necessary level of inflation necessary to keep increasing hash. The inflation rate will continuously decrease. My proposal is a constant block reward until that rate of inflation approaches 3%, then you adjust block reward to annually create 3% inflation. Whoever implements this and adopts this will be rich because I am certain that at some point BTC will fail. |
|
|
|
(Mining profit = block reward + fees)
(Mining profit = (block reward)/2 + fees) in 1 year
(Mining profit = (block reward)/4 + fees) in 5 years
(Mining profit = (block reward)/8 + fees) in 9 years
It should be obvious that if you remove a source of mining income, miners will profit less. You are incorrectly treating "fees" as a constant. The issue with your presentation, and everyone else that has explained this, is that "transaction fees will support mining."
1) There's no proof of this.
There is strong evidence to suggest that fees will increase significantly over time. 2) It really does not matter.
I think I am finally beginning to understand your misunderstanding. You seem to think that: - Incentives only work if they are "new" coins
- Therefore, inflation is necessary to provide an incentive
- Therefore, anyone disagreeing you must be afraid of inflation
Your premise (first point) is wrong. Your second point is wrong due to relying on the first point. Your obsession with point three is baffling. +1000 killed off OPs Trolling, also reading this thread i was amazed to actually learn something, the whole deflationry thing and the velocity of money correcting itself as tx / block reward changes very interesting, also as the value of a currency rises people will still spend, if there Btc goes from $300 to $400 overnight and they need there weekly shop then they will just buy there weekly shop and keep $100 to appreciate in value, the only hoarders will be those that can afford to hoard and there appreciation will be the same per bitcoin as everybody elses. I think when the mining of new coins ends we could see (as some suggested) smaller companies take on Tx processing as they have interests to keep the network alive, this seems to be a good thing as any centralisation of miners over time could be reversed, and that would put Tx processing back in the hands of everybody. I most certainly understand the transaction fee scenario, but you don't. For BTC to to have value, miners must secure the network. If miners do not constantly increase hash, Moore's law will catch up to the network and it will become prone to attack. This should be easily accepted as fact. If you don't accept this premise i can't possibly help you understand the deflationary flaw in bitcoin. If you don't understand, let me try to explain it again. If hash remains constant and doesn't increase for a number of years, technological advancements (Moore's Law) will make an 51% attack more likely. Now what some people seem to argue is that tx fees will support mining growth. This is true in two scenarios. 1) bitcoins are sent/received more frequently (velocity) 2) tx fees increase I will addresses the problems with both scenarios. The problem with #2 is that there is a cap on maximum fee the miners can charge, at 100%. So velocity remains constant, miners cannot increase profit beyond 100% tx fee. So this cannot create increasing profit. The problem with #1 is that bicoins can be permanently lost, and there is a hard cap on the amount of bitcoins. That means that there will eventually be more bitcoin lost than is generated by block reward. This should be known as the 'Sweft point' where bitcoin turns into a deflationary currency from an inflationary one. Thus, to believe that transactions will increase as coins are lost, aka deflation, is not a sound proposition. Another issue is that rogue miners can mine the network, charging tx fees and sending the coins to the trash. This would further exaggerate the deflationary tendency of the bitcoin design. Thus it should be obvious to anyone that understands the issues to also understand that there exists a simple solution which will make the person who implements it rich. Make an alt currency with a cap minimum 3% inflation. This will satisfy the profits of the miners and hash of the network. |
|
|
|
|
WHERE IS THE POLICE REPORT?
|
|
|
|
How about we wait for mtgox to reopen before we start throwing all this shit around? If they truly want to stay in business, then lying to the bitcoin community is one of the last things they would want to do.
If they truly want to stay in business, then they certainly must understand that their customers expect verification of their claims. A photocopy of a police report would be a wonderful start. Otherwise, I expect them to lose a tremendous number of their customer base (and, therefore, holdings) shortly after they re-open. Yep. Where is the evidence? MtGox? |
|
|
|
If the police are involved, then a case number should be provided...
1. I do not trust the police. 2. Nobody forced anyone to use MtGox! The issue here is the one between MtGox and the hacker... Maybe you should go: "Oh I was really stupid. I used a fucking weak password, and I put all my money in one place, I must be a genius!" If fraud was committed, it's irrelevant. Fraud was committed. Legal proceedings should proceed and parties should be judged as so. So basically by your analysis it's irrelevant whether or not MtGox stole money, because users decided to sign up? |
|
|
|
If the bitcoins were in fact stolen, then you had no legal expectation of keeping them no matter what price you bought them at. In fact, you're lucky you are getting a roll-back rather than losing your investment completely. If a cop found you in possession of a stolen vehicle, it won't matter that you paid for it. They'll take it from you and give it back to the rightful owner. It would then be your responsibility to go after the person who sold it to you.
Having said that, we have no way to validate the official story as it stands. I do not necessarily trust or distrust MtGox. But they need to provide confirmation of their own statements of fact. If the police are involved, then a case number should be provided. Perhaps a scanned copy of a police report? I'd have much more trust in MtGox if I knew the owner has reported this to the police, if for no other reason than the fact that filing a false police report is typically a felony.
Stop. Stop now. Let the law decide what is or isn't. Not you. Not me. Not MtGox. 4 Days until MtGox is open? Are you serious? HAHAHA. Idiots. |
|
|
|
|
Arresting people serves a purpose. So that they can post or be denied bail. In this situation the risk for damage should encourage a judge to deny bail. The total amount of potential hardship that he can inflict is in the 10m+ dollar range. If he is allowed bail, all of your money is at risk. At this point all hardware associated with MtGox should be seized and he should be confined to prison until trial.
People who believe that MtGox should set the rules and become law are delusional religious crackheads.
|
|
|
|
|
MtGox should be jailed.
Kevin should sue MtGox.
You guys are idiots for believing this criminal. He should not be allowed to follow through with his plan. There are no rules regarding this action. The law should guide this decision, not subjective critique. This needs to be subjected to the scrutiny of the legal system.
I don't understand how you have faith in MtGox to solve this crisis.
|
|
|
|
The idiots on this forum tolerating it are akin to religious fanatics, as you say.
bottom line is.. he delivered a high-liquid exchange for BCTs.. I've got BOTs trading 24/7 . us traders enjoy mtgox exchange and many are making lots of $ of newfags who think they know how to trade. give us an alternative and we wont give a shit about mtgox. Mtgox is fundamentally flawed and will not survive in its curent form. but it the best we got for USDBTC liquidity. liquidity bitches.... liquidity If you knew how to trade you wouldn't be trading bitcoins, religious fanatic. Grow a brain. |
|
|
|
|
MtGox: Can you post information regarding the "criminal proceedings" you claimed above?
|
|
|
|
This is potentially a 5-10m heist. No one knows what's going on.
This should open up lawsuits and criminal proceedings. We don't know if MtGox stole it or what his intentions were. We don't know ANYTHING.
You guys are blind religious fanatics for trusting this idiot. I hope he contacts the FBI. He's at least negligent and worst, a criminal.
The troll factor is high today Religious zealotry? |
|
|
|
This is potentially a 5-10m heist. No one knows what's going on.
This should open up lawsuits and criminal proceedings. We don't know if MtGox stole it or what his intentions were. We don't know ANYTHING.
You guys are blind religious fanatics for trusting this idiot. I hope he contacts the FBI. He's at least negligent and worst, a criminal.
We already have criminal proceedings in process against whoever did the hack. LOL. Can you show proof of anything you say? How many times have you lied? You post information regarding users in a public forum? Seriously? You should be jailed for the way you handled this. So you know who the perpetrator was? Please tell us. Do you have criminal proceedings against a fake identity? Who exactly do you have criminal proceedings against? |
|
|
|
|
This is potentially a 5-10m heist. No one knows what's going on.
This should open up lawsuits and criminal proceedings. We don't know if MtGox stole it or what his intentions were. We don't know ANYTHING.
You guys are blind religious fanatics for trusting this idiot. I hope he contacts the FBI. He's at least negligent and worst, a criminal.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
