Within 5 years you will be able to get a 1 TH/s USB stick that is also a hardware wallet for $5.
This would be sweet, indeed! |
|
|
|
I know bitcoin depends on finding the solution, but imagine the whole world is a mining pool.
Seems that businesses like ASICminer are the mining pools of the future, where anyone can simply own a piece of a mining operation. |
|
|
|
... cannot be controlled, seized, restricted or issued by some government, company, FED, central bank, or any other authority...
Hmm... Are you sure you understand what mining is all about? Mining is a construction to decentralize the issuing of new bitcoins and creating global consensus about what transactions took place. Then I guess you didn't yet notice the widespread consolidation that's been taking place in the bitcoin mining space?... Oh well. |
|
|
|
... cannot be controlled, seized, restricted or issued by some government, company, FED, central bank, or any other authority...
Hmm... Are you sure you understand what mining is all about? |
|
|
|
Next, the miners would get the name of The Red Shield bank... and I would be called Nathan Rothschild  Mega-hoarder of the World! Not to burst your bubble or anything, but the Rothschild's built their name and fortunes by increasing the currency circulation (starting with the Napoleonic Wars), not by hoarding and trading gold (which, sure, had preceded the former). One could even say that this was the only difference between the Smeagols and the Rothschilds. |
|
|
|
its not hoarding, its saving . . .
Saving is done by consumers and merchants; Hoarding is done by miners (a.k.a. the central banks of bitcoin economy). |
|
|
|
There is nothing wrong with saving,
True, but only if you are referring to "savings by the producers of economic value" (businesses, organizations, employees, etc). However, if you are referring to "savings by the central banks", then you must think that bankers (sorry, I meant to suggest the GOLD 2.0 miners) run the bitcoin economy? |
|
|
|
My suspicion is that miners are hoarding most coins right now because they can cover their energy costs selling just a few. We will see difficulty increase until it becomes self limiting and once all miners are forced to liquidate to pay for electric costs the price will crash as their is no way that people will put a half million dollars a day into buying newly minted BTC, the amount necessary to sustain the current price.
Well-said, well-said... This goes to show that miners don't really have an incentive to hoard bitcoins beyond the GOLD 2.0 era we are currently in. If only we had figured out how to make the best use of that era in creating a bitcoin economy that doesn't have to rely on fiat currencies for commerce transactions? |
|
|
|
Banks would need to take control of the 51% hashing power and propose to move decimal places from 8 to 9 (or so). But to understand what I've just said requires that you change your thinking from deflationary bitcoins to inflationary satoshies.
It is irrelevant to interest rates in deflation problem. If you borrow 1 BTC you have to give back 1 BTC no matter how many decimal places were added to protocol in meantime. Not if you borrow satoshies in the first place. |
|
|
|
Let's say we have 21M bitcoins and a free-market economy based on them. Everyone has some of those bitcoins and are exchanging them with each other for services and goods. Now, if I am a bank, how do I get more money to pay my lenders? I understand that the things you can buy with your coins grows overtime, but how do you get more money itself?
Banks would need to take control of the 51% hashing power and propose to move decimal places from 8 to 9 (or so). But to understand what I've just said requires that you change your thinking from deflationary bitcoins to inflationary satoshies. |
|
|
|
Oh yeah, and there's that poison pill!... in case the miners were to decide that I'm bluffing about the invitation to negotiate.
|
|
|
|
I agree that at some point we'll need to adopt names for incremental BTC, like "dimes" or "nickles, etc.
What's wrong with using satohies across the board, e.g. 100,000,000 satoshies instead of 1 BTC? Oh, I get it, perhaps you are worried that using satoshies would mean that BTC is in fact an inflationary currency, especially when a decision is made to change from 8 decimal places to 10 and so forth. |
|
|
|
Hmmm... How about a hint then? You are a miner, right? Spend some BTC to come and visit me in Chicago... Perhaps for a local Bitcoin Meetup that's coming up on June 4th... We can chat privately then. I do not demonize the bitcoin's store of value function... only the widespread GOLD 2.0 phenomenon. Can you explain the difference? To me the main driving factor of "Gold 2.0" phenomenon is bitcoins store of value function. That's the only real similarity to gold that I see, and (at least to me) apparently the only reason people keep referring to bitcoins as "Gold 2.0". Sure, but in a face-to-face conversation only... There's already a sizable bid wall on Mt.Gox... Don't want for it to crumble, yet. |
|
|
|
So, doing away with the GOLD 2.0 mania throughout the bitcoin community (through education on the inner workings of BTC currency) is the first step to getting the miners to start putting into circulation more batches of bitcoins.
Why are miners not circulating coins? Are you implying that they should PRODUCE more coins or just SPEND more coins? By "circulating" I merely imply SPEND more coins... But to answer you first question, why would miners be motivated to consistently spend coins to fuel the bitcoin economy if they believed in the GOLD 2.0 miracle? Hence the need for the vaccine against the GOLD 2.0 bug. |
|
|
|
With a poison pill, if need be.  But let's hope it doesn't have to come to that... While gradual changes benefit the majority, an abrupt one would only benefit my ego and the pockets of those who had prepared for the change. What is this "poison pill"? It's not the qualities of gold that's the problem, it is the pervasive treatment of those qualities as gold. Speculation is healthy for the bitcoin economy, but only if it is based on the expectations about future "economic" growth, and not on the proliferation of GOLD 2.0 worshiping.
But a storage of value is valuable. Speculation that a store of value will gain value should be expected. Why demonize it? |
|
|
|
How do you get all miners to agree to this? How do you prevent miners from secretly retaining a key they "destroyed" in order to retain large volumes of wealth?
With a poison pill, if need be. But let's hope it doesn't have to come to that... While gradual changes benefit the majority, an abrupt one would only benefit my ego and the pockets of those who had prepared for the change.
Also, why is it so bad that bitcoin acts like a "Gold 2.0"? The world needs something like gold that does't require physical storage and can be easily transported worldwide. Why would you want to destroy that?
It's not the qualities of gold that's the problem, it is the pervasive treatment of those qualities as gold. Speculation is healthy for the bitcoin economy, but only if it is based on the expectations about future "economic" growth, and not on the proliferation of GOLD 2.0 worshiping. |
|
|
|
Did you mean to write deflationary spiral? Or??
Why do you and others still assume that when I'm discussing deflation or inflation I refer to BTC exchange rate fluctuations? Remember, I don't speak the GOLD 2.0 dialect... I speak straight up BTC!  Are you interested in learning how to speak proper BTC (will be offering classes soon)? In the meantime, may I suggest that you take maximum advantage of the GOLD 2.0 era exchange rates. Basically you could invert the idea of Gold 2.0 and create the same kind of economy the US is based on.
But don't just take my word for it.
Is this why you are obsessed with the validity of the statement that 1 bitcoin could still service the entire world and keep referring to a "vaccine to gold 2.0"?
Yes, something like that.
|
|
|
|
either you are a very smart delusional, or just delusional. How does a new bitcoin fork change anything, sounds like a scam.
Ok here the steps: 1. Some government tries to buy up all the Bitcoins, so they pump millions after millions in it |
|
|
|
If I want to start a bitcoin based store, it requires me to purchase all tangibles in fiat. This only supports the dollar economy.
Point well-made!Now, where are da bees at?(quietly pulls out his wizard hat and sniffs around) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
