Refer to 'VERIFYING' not mining when explaining the bitcoin

[genjix]

Hey,

When explaining to people about bitcoin, do yourself a favour by talking about bitcoins being introduced through the process of verifying transactions. The verifiers gain a reward for securing the network against attack.

People understand faster than when I use the ill fated gold mining analogy. Verifying more accurately conveys the nature of confirmations. Mining has the negative connotation of being a way for people to get free (gratis) money.

[1715227393]

1715227393

[1715227393]

1715227393

[1715227393]

1715227393

[error]

I call it "transaction processing" since that's pretty much what it is.

[wumpus]

Excellent idea!

[DATA COMMANDER]

But aren't bitcoins backed by teh compootah powah?!

Explain yourself! 

[error]

But aren't bitcoins backed by teh compootah powah?!

Explain yourself! 

Yes, they are.

If you read the source code, you will find the 50BTC reward is called a subsidy. The idea being that until the network is bootstrapped and a cash economy exists, transaction processors will need a reason other than transaction fees to process transactions (of which there were none for many thousands of blocks).

[DATA COMMANDER]

But aren't bitcoins backed by teh compootah powah?!

Explain yourself! 

Yes, they are.

If you read the source code, you will find the 50BTC reward is called a subsidy. The idea being that until the network is bootstrapped and a cash economy exists, transaction processors will need a reason other than transaction fees to process transactions (of which there were none for many thousands of blocks).

I was just kidding. Bitcoins aren't "backed" by CPU cycles.

[FreeMoney]

Verifying the validity of a tx is super fast and easy. Burying is more like it. The more and more difficult blocks piled on top the harder it is to dig them back up.