All the more reason to stick with the major coins that are more likely to last a long time. As long as Bitcoin is a top coin with a large market cap, there will be miners. The fees might be high, but the miners are going to make their profit.
But that is the point. If the giant mining farms in China wants to, they can put a stranglehold on transactions to the point where you are effectively unable to sell/transfer your Bitcoin unless you give them a huge part of your money. Even more dangerous is that with control comes the ability to favor their own transactions, much like the illegal practice of front-running in stock markets. |
|
|
|
You're not wrong but this is more of a problem for a centralized mining mob like the one running Bcash.
The intention was never to have large-scale mining farms to control majority of the hashrate. Irony is if centralization leads to crypto bubble bursting, nobody stands to gain including the miners. It's not in any miner's interest to corner the market.
I may indeed not have been the intention. But is is nonetheless the result. We are rapidly getting to the point where it will in reality become China which controls mining - and then China will in reality be controlling the crypto currencies including Bitcoin |
|
|
|
20% a day means that within a week the price would be $0 so I assume you mean a 20% drop in one day. Let's say it happens today, the current price is $7720, a dip in the price of 20% would be around about $1500 so the price will be $6200. Doesn't look that bad, I would hold my btc (no reason to 'panic sell') and I would definitely buy more coins, no questions asked. Cheap coins are the best coins. You don't know how percentages work, do you? |
|
|
|
You're not wrong but this is more of a problem for a centralized mining mob like the one running Bcash.
The intention was never to have large-scale mining farms to control majority of the hashrate. Irony is if centralization leads to crypto bubble bursting, nobody stands to gain including the miners. It's not in any miner's interest to corner the market.
It is always in a supplier's interest to corner the market and become a monopoly if they can |
|
|
|
Supply : 314 Million, Block Interval : 45 Seconds, 1 BTC = 31 BTR
well, 15 times the total supply of btc, how about the block reword and the btr price?
block reward 750 btr with btr initially at .4BTC |
|
|
|
|
When you put your money in cryptocurrencies, the miners will control your life.
If the miners decide to switch to another altcoin you cannot sell any of your coins - no matter which coin it is, even Bitcoin. If they reduce their efforts prices to transfer becomes extremely high. If you have a lot of your money in cryptocurrencies, the miners will become your new slave masters
|
|
|
|
You can create Bitcoin2 and say that this is the same thing as Bitcoin, but will people be buying your Bitcoin2 at $7,000+ per coin? I seriously doubt that.
No they won't - and that is also why the realization will sink in that there is also no need to buy Bitcoin at those levels at all, and the party will come to an end |
|
|
|
Bitcoins supply still has more compared to other bitcoin crypto. It is still capable to circulate all over the world.
All crypto are capable of circulating all over the world |
|
|
|
The argument is again and again that the value of Bitcoin will increase because supply is limited to 21 million. But this is quite simply wrong. Every time Bitcoin is forked that is in real terms an expansion of the Bitcoin currency beyond 21 million. To some degree the same is true of alternative crypto currencies which will flood the market. There is already more than 1000 cryptocurrencues ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cryptocurrencies ) You simply cant compare bitcoins with BCH or BTG. They might work on very same blockchain but are quite dissimilar. First thing the value of bitcoin cash is nothing in comparison with BTC. Bitcoin supply isnt increasing its just a parallel bitcoin being formed. Of course I can. The cryptocurrencies are essentially fungible |
|
|
|
No, the supply is limited. If someone forked bitcoin then it will become a different coin, completely different than the bitcoin itself. The argument is again and again that the value of Bitcoin will increase because supply is limited to 21 million. But this is quite simply wrong. Every time Bitcoin is forked that is in real terms an expansion of the Bitcoin currency beyond 21 million. To some degree the same is true of alternative crypto currencies which will flood the market. There is already more than 1000 cryptocurrencues ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cryptocurrencies ) Th forking (or absence of it) does not effect Bitcoin's supply. At best, you can consider it as a "gift" to all bitcoin holders, which will increase the overall worth. It in no way impacts the overall supply of 21 Mn, which is set in stone. That is precisely my point. I create "Bitcoin2" by forking. Then I create "Bitcoin3" and so on and so on. In reality what I am doing is issuing more Bitcoin. That I call it a different name does not change the reality. You create bitcoin A B C or something else but the amount of your original bitcoin is still the same.You are issuing another coin, forked from bitcoin. You can fork bitcoin 10 times but it will be useless if no one support that chain. I agree with your assessment if that fork did not get enough support they will just be considered as altcoin with the name bitcoin on it, there's only one bitcoin and it's supply is limited and cannot be changed. You argument si completely flawed, because there clearly is a demand for these altcoins |
|
|
|
You really don't get it do you?
A person wants to invest 100 USD of real money in cryptocurrencies. If there was only one crypto - Bitcoin - with a limited supply, then over time you can argue price will go up as long as that person really want to by crypto for his USD. But when you then have more and more cryptocurrencies, some of the people will choose to put their 100USD in competing cryptos. And this means in reality that the supply of crypto currency is growing exponentially and without limits
You could make the same argument for any investable asset. There are tens of thousands of stocks and bonds, and yet many investors pour large sums into them. You could also say that if another online retailer starts up, then that somehow devalues Amazon. And it does. It is called competition. You really do not get it. |
|
|
|
The fork was made to introduce a coin that can probably divert the bitcoin market not increase the supply of bitcoin none in this place or even no one can increase the supply of bitcoin this thing makes bitcoin weak because as the demand continue growing the supply need to accomodate them all but since its limited the only way is to increase the value of bitcoin.
The cryptoes are fungible, hence doesn't matter what you label them |
|
|
|
I think that your question is: Who is controlling the Bitcoin? And who will regulate the development of Blockchain?
Maybe, you are trying to discover the direction of the Blockchain Development and how the mother of this processes will survive in this JUNGLE!
Greed is controlling bitcoin now |
|
|
|
It does not affect the maximum suppply of Bitcoin. If you fork Bitcoin there would be an altcoins (Name of the fork) + Bitcoin) They are trying to make a 2.0 Version of bitcoin. It would not really change anything with Bitcoin it self.
You really don't get it do you? A person wants to invest 100 USD of real money in cryptocurrencies. If there was only one crypto - Bitcoin - with a limited supply, then over time you can argue price will go up as long as that person really want to by crypto for his USD. But when you then have more and more cryptocurrencies, some of the people will choose to put their 100USD in competing cryptos. And this means in reality that the supply of crypto currency is growing exponentially and without limits |
|
|
|
Coins are only as valuable as people deem them to be
Yes - is is purely a fantasy and like all dreams you will wake up and it will be gone. There will only be one Bitcoin. Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin Gold are altcoins, much like Litecoin or Ethereum.
Clearly you are driven by a religious belief. " There will only one god" replaced by " there will only be one Bitcoin". But as in all religions, people tend to start beleiving the "one god" is slightly different and then you get different gods and wars over who believes in the true god. The recent war between Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash is only the begining. Ultimately these will all destroy each other and credibility in the cryptocurrencies will be totally gone. |
|
|
|
gold has a limited supply.
gold is an element in the periodic table, but we have 118 total elements. does this mean when we extract lets say iron from iron ores we are increasing the gold supply? if so then yeah bitcoin supply is increasing with fork too!
Do you really believe that the comparison you make is relevant? Are you really that stupid? |
|
|
|
|
All the acolytes in here are clearly religious - "21 million" is the holy word, and thou shall not dare to say otherwise.
Bitcoin and the altcoins are all competing for the same attention/market and therefore cannot in any way be seen as independent. Saying the mantra "21 million" will at the end of the day mean nothing when market power takes over and the inevitable crash comes around partially due to massive oversupply
|
|
|
|
The argument is again and again that the value of Bitcoin will increase because supply is limited to 21 million. But this is quite simply wrong. Every time Bitcoin is forked that is in real terms an expansion of the Bitcoin currency beyond 21 million. To some degree the same is true of alternative crypto currencies which will flood the market. There is already more than 1000 cryptocurrencues ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cryptocurrencies ) Th forking (or absence of it) does not effect Bitcoin's supply. At best, you can consider it as a "gift" to all bitcoin holders, which will increase the overall worth. It in no way impacts the overall supply of 21 Mn, which is set in stone. That is precisely my point. I create "Bitcoin2" by forking. Then I create "Bitcoin3" and so on and so on. In reality what I am doing is issuing more Bitcoin. That I call it a different name does not change the reality. |
|
|
|
I just don't understand why people are creating a lot of tokens even if there are a lot of it already? Will these not affect the value of Altcoins?
Because it is so easy to create, people will continue to create more and more cryptocurrencies and ultimately they will all (including Bitcoin) be worthless because you cannot control supply. People argue that Bitcoin has a limited supply of 21 million but in real life that is not true. Every time it gets forked, in reality you are just seeing the supply be expanded to get far far beyond 21 million |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
