Bitcoin Forum
May 21, 2018, 09:13:02 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.16.0  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
  Home Help Search Donate Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 [93]
1841  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin amount limit on: July 05, 2011, 01:05:18 AM
Why do people complain about Bitcoin not being inflationary with the amount of inflationary currencies around the world? Almost all of them are inflationary. Its not like you dont have a choice...

Yea, seems people have been preprogrammed to want more of the same.  Spoon or the Fork.

Fork the spoon.

But inevitably, there is no spoon.  It's what you make of it.

There is a fundamental difference between a central bank issuing new currency and a p2p network asking for the issuance of new currency. One relies on those in power to determine what's best; the other is based on demand. But sure, they are the same thing. Inflation is the debilllll and so on.
1842  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: My Response to Ben Laurie’s ‘Last Word’ on Bitcoin on: July 05, 2011, 12:49:53 AM
Once again:

The cost of producing hashs is not a short term cost. It requires a long term investment in the hardware that produces them, so unless there's a way to double spend for hundreds of blocks without crashing the value of bitcoins, it would not be worth it. It would be more lucrative to just be honest.

Proponents of bitcoin have trouble grasping the fact that "evil empire" won't care about the lucrativity. Bitcoin is powered by fiat and probably always will be, there is almost no way to separate the two unless electric companies start taking bitcoins as payment. If someone wants to mess with bitcoin purely to mess with it, the resources required are far from insurmountable. Crashing bitcoin would be the endgame, not a side effect.
1843  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Why was bitcoin designed with no inflation? on: July 05, 2011, 12:41:04 AM
I have a theory: because it would not enrich the creator and very early adopters as well as the defined schedule does.  The first year+ of bitcoin's existence was simply early adopters minting themselves bitcoins.  Look at the block chain, it's obvious; real-looking transactions didn't become common until 4 months ago or so.

This isn't much of a theory, it's more of a fact. Bitcoin was designed to make early adopters as much fiat money as possible without regard to the functioning of the currency. There will be alternatives soon enough though.
1844  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: I'm an undeserving early adopter, and here is my side. on: July 04, 2011, 05:58:29 PM
medium of exchange... shmedium of exchange...

This is a fairly simple concept. Fiat money are presently a decent 'medium of exchange', gold is historically a decent 'store of value'. At the same time fiat money are horrible 'store of value' and gold is lousy 'medium of exchange'.

It's a little miracle that Bitcoin actually has properties which make it (maybe only potentially yet) both decent 'medium of exchange' AND 'store of value'. It is just for some reason people tend to focus on one side or another and fail to see the big picture.

Perhaps one needs an INTP mind (or some serious effort plus knowledge of basics of crypto and economy) to get all the bitcoin's intertwined concepts and see how it is a nobrainer that bitcoin is way better than both fiat and gold.

Survival of the fittest at it's finest.


Gold is historically a decent 'store of value'? Did you miss that a few decades ago, gold was the medium of exchange? It was printed on paper though, so perhaps that is confusing you.

As long as bitcoins are difficult to acquire and people demand them, bitcoins will have value. Giving out less to each person who mines as more people mine, and on top of that halving the amount given out every few years is unnecessary to retain value; it is necessary only to increase value. As fiat currency inflates, bitcoins would equally require more fiat to buy since they currently require fiat to produce. That would make it a safe hedge against inflation. Not so great an investment, but certainly a nice medium of exchange which is what bitcoin is advertised as. As it is now, it really is only an investment backed on the idea that it could be a medium of exchange. But that falls apart when people realize that the coins they mine serve to make every coin before it more valuable.

You can't eat your cake and have it too.

And what does survival of the fittest have to do with anything?
1845  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: I'm an undeserving early adopter, and here is my side. on: July 04, 2011, 03:39:01 PM
Fine. Do you agree then that the primary role of a currency is to be a medium of exchange?

If that is the case, why are there only 10s of trades per block when there are 50,000+ people mining for bitcoins?
Are most of those trades just trades from mtgox and tradehill?

Is Bitcoin safe as a currency when almost a negligible amount is actually used as a medium of exchange, and the rest used to speculate?

There is no end in sight for the investment aspect. Why would anyone ever spend?

We're supposed to imagine that in a year or two when the reward drops to 25BTC, half of the miners have to quit or that there will be 50,000 transactions per 10 minutes (at .0005)? [or twice as easy to over take the network]

If bitcoin can't act as a medium of exchange, it is going to fail.
1846  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Getting concerned on: July 04, 2011, 02:55:55 PM
Quote
First 1.6 million BTC were mined at a difficulty of 1, which requires about 7Mhash/s.
At first, the code was not nearly as optimized as it is now.
I wasn't 100% clear, but I meant it takes about 7Mhash/s to get a block every 10 minutes, which was basically what happened. See the block chain.

Quote
I don't have the exact proof, but I highly doubt this.
Highly doubt what? The proof is in the pudding. Processing power has not dramatically changed in the last couple of years. My triple core 3.1GHz hashes about 1.5MH/s and it is almost a year old.

Quote
Cpu mining may use less electricity, but it's efficiency is TERRIBLE. As in... My 5870 gets 400mh/s for the (way highside)300 watts it uses. That's 1.33h/w.
My core 2 quad at overclocked to 3.2 must be using something around ~100watts and it gets about 12mh/s. That's 0.12mh/s.

It's not about how much you use, but about the efficiency.

My numbers are somewhat fuzzy, too lazy to look up hard data, but you get my point.
Yeah 12mh/s equaling 0.12mh/s is definitely a bit fuzzy.
1847  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: I'm an undeserving early adopter, and here is my side. on: July 04, 2011, 02:43:52 PM
So you used some conjugation of "invest" at least 10 times in your post. Why can't bitcoin be a currency, not an investment? (Aside from programming design, of course.)

Is it because it wouldn't have caught on? There is so much praise for how bitcoin will revolutionize the world, but this could only be accomplished by promising wealth off of the fiat of others?

Currencies are, inherently, investments.
Really? I thought they were a medium of exchange. Just because they are used as an investment does not make them "inherently" one.

Business minds disagree with you.

http://www.businessinsider.com/why-currency-can-never-be-an-investment-2010-9
1848  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Getting concerned on: July 04, 2011, 04:03:20 AM
The more I look through the forums I see people with negative comments and bad wishes.  When I first started looking into this earlier I was so excited about it and seen this as a great thing.  These people have me concerned.  I have seen all kinds of scams and pyramids and the more I read the more I see a resemblance.  Please help me to see the light again.  I have great ideas for this to work.

I did some calculations while the network hash was 10.62Thash/s according to bitcoincharts.com. Please note this is now showing as 11.86 in less than a week.

Assumptions: 200Mh/s for an average GPU; 200W of electricity for an average GPU, 100W for a CPU; $0.15/kWh

55,700 miners based on those numbers.
An average miner makes 8 cents an hour at a $15/1BTC exchange rate.
11.14MW to make 300 BTC (1 hour's worth); $1,670 in electricity, or $5.57 per 1 BTC.
First 1.6 million BTC were mined at a difficulty of 1, which requires about 7Mhash/s. This means there were no more than 5-10 people mining (perhaps less) for the first 32,000 blocks.
These people used CPU mining which uses less electricity.

100W*10 people = 1 kWh to create 300 BTC, or $0.0005 per BTC. Going just by the cost of electricity, the cost to make these 1.6 million BTC is 1/11,140th what it would take today.

Between that original 1.6 million and today’s amount of BitCoins [approx. 6.6 million], it is hard to even guess how much electricity cost was used to make a BitCoin on average. But as the next million and a half BTC and more were still mined relatively easily, please allow me make a gross guestimate of a $2/BTC average electricity cost after the first 1.6 million coins. Using this number, we can get an average value per BTC. ((1.6M*0.0005)+(5M*2))/6.6M = $1.52. Today’s rate of $5.57 minus the average rate of $1.52 equals a $4.05 difference in cost to produce. That means for every BTC mined today, $4.05 or 73% of its electric value is equalized across every coin made before it. But as time passes and if the network grows, BitCoins become more scarce and require more work to mine, so those getting in at $5.57 are still, apparently, getting a deal.

A coin that is mined at a cost of $5.57 can be turned around and sold for $17, a 305% return. An original 1.6 million coin can be sold for a 3,400,000% return. Assuming continued network growth and controlled scarcity (less bitcoins given out to more people as time passes; no large sell-offs), these returns will continue to grow. But assuming there are no large sell offs is a huge assumption since it has already happened with 25k coins, and it caused a 65% drop in the value on mtgox.
1849  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: I'm an undeserving early adopter, and here is my side. on: July 04, 2011, 03:50:19 AM
See above. Investing isn't free. For every investment that pays off, like bitcoin, there are 10 investments where I never see my money again.

So you used some conjugation of "invest" at least 10 times in your post. Why can't bitcoin be a currency, not an investment? (Aside from programming design, of course.)

Is it because it wouldn't have caught on? There is so much praise for how bitcoin will revolutionize the world, but this could only be accomplished by promising wealth off of the fiat of others?
1850  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Compile error on PS3 on: June 29, 2011, 07:40:16 AM
Do you need to have an old version of a PS3 without the update that removed linux?

It's a shame it only does 20mh/s, one would think with the fancy cell processor it might do better.
1851  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: What will happen once the mining stops? on: June 28, 2011, 09:13:38 PM
Just some numbers... with the current transaction fee of 0.0005, there would need to be 50,000 paying transactions every 10 minutes on average to equal the same amount of coins mined now--when the award halves at block 210k.
Pages: « 1 ... 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 [93]
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!