Bitcoin Forum
November 25, 2017, 08:31:06 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Should we follow THE PLAN and halve the block reward according to Satoshi's whitepaper?
Yes - 169 (88.5%)
No, let's keep it 50 BTC forever - 14 (7.3%)
No, but 50 BTC is not a good number neither - 8 (4.2%)
Total Voters: 190

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: 1BR: Should the block reward be 50 BTC for ages?  (Read 5665 times)
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
September 13, 2012, 08:32:37 PM
 #21

It seems to me that u r right. So there is no way to change Bitcoin. Any changes will likely lead to a fork.

Well Bitcoin is what a majority (preferrably a near consensus super majority) say it is.  There already has been one hard fork to the protocol.  The fork which is known as Bitcoin is what people say it is.  It is just for something as controversial as changing the minting rate it is unlikely you will ever get enough of a consensus to pull it off.

The worst case scenario would be two incompatible forks both supported by a sizable fraction of the bitcoin "community" (merchants, exchanges, developers, miners, users).   The confusion and chaos would likely undermine both chains.

1511598666
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511598666

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511598666
Reply with quote  #2

1511598666
Report to moderator
Join ICO Now A blockchain platform for effective freelancing
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Etlase2
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798


View Profile
September 13, 2012, 08:37:47 PM
 #22

Meanwhile, the 5% of miners who stayed with the original Bitcoin blockchain are still happily mining along and keeping transactions moving along, the currency still has value, and people are still making transactions with it.

Well, besides the fact that transactions will take 20 times longer to confirm for 2016 blocks (10 months).  Kiss

Come-from-Beyond
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1778

Newbie


View Profile
September 13, 2012, 08:43:48 PM
 #23

Meanwhile, the 5% of miners who stayed with the original Bitcoin blockchain are still happily mining along and keeping transactions moving along, the currency still has value, and people are still making transactions with it.

Well, besides the fact that transactions will take 20 times longer to confirm for 2016 blocks (10 months).  Kiss

This is a weakness of Bitcoin btw. USA government has an option to mine bitcoin with a lot of power to raise difficulty. And repeat it after difficulty drops to previous level.
im3w1l
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280


View Profile
September 13, 2012, 09:20:51 PM
 #24

Personally, I think that the reward as a fraction of the current amount of coins should remain constant. A slow (~0.1%) inflation per year would be healthy to compensate for permanently lost coins. Of course if a procedure for recycling coins that haven't been used in a long time was implemented that would not be needed.
SgtSpike
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile
September 13, 2012, 10:09:59 PM
 #25

Meanwhile, the 5% of miners who stayed with the original Bitcoin blockchain are still happily mining along and keeping transactions moving along, the currency still has value, and people are still making transactions with it.

Well, besides the fact that transactions will take 20 times longer to confirm for 2016 blocks (10 months).  Kiss

This is a weakness of Bitcoin btw. USA government has an option to mine bitcoin with a lot of power to raise difficulty. And repeat it after difficulty drops to previous level.
That may be true today, but once ASIC's are out and difficulty increases 10-fold, the supercomputers go from making a difference in difficulty to making a scratch.  Supercomputers just aren't well suited for Bitcoin mining compared to a dedicated ASIC processor.
jwzguy
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868



View Profile
September 13, 2012, 11:26:22 PM
 #26

Personally, I think that the reward as a fraction of the current amount of coins should remain constant. A slow (~0.1%) inflation per year would be healthy to compensate for permanently lost coins. Of course if a procedure for recycling coins that haven't been used in a long time was implemented that would not be needed.
Recycling unused coins is dangerous. No matter how it's implemented, people won't feel safe knowing that their savings could vanish because they haven't moved them around. Not to mention, there is no reason to do it - because there is no need to compensate for lost coins. We can simply divide existing bitcoins further, indefinitely.

19wXnWTeGuraN9g5UsMAi119sWzDCQcr7S
Bitcoin Logo shirts!
Etlase2
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798


View Profile
September 13, 2012, 11:27:43 PM
 #27

Not to mention, there is no reason to do it - because there is no need to compensate for lost coins.

There is the never-ending block chain bloat to consider.

jwzguy
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868



View Profile
September 13, 2012, 11:35:42 PM
 #28

Not to mention, there is no reason to do it - because there is no need to compensate for lost coins.

There is the never-ending block chain bloat to consider.
Ahhhh, it'll be fine.  Wink

19wXnWTeGuraN9g5UsMAi119sWzDCQcr7S
Bitcoin Logo shirts!
jjiimm_64
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1862


View Profile
September 14, 2012, 01:42:07 AM
 #29

Many people are holding on to Bitcoins BECAUSE they don't inflate.  If you introduce infinite inflation, expect people to drop them like hot potatoes, and the value of them to drop equally fast.

Miners would actually make much less per block in terms of dollars if the block reward was sustained at 50 BTC indefinitely, because the price of BTC would drop so much once people knew they would be inflated forever.

EXACTLY:

The one thing that caught my attention (and held ever since) back in june 2011 is the statement:  "There will never be more then 21M bitcoins.....ever".  I suggest if you get a bunch to put them offline and revisit them in a couple years!!

1jimbitm6hAKTjKX4qurCNQubbnk2YsFw
gmaxwell
Staff
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2338



View Profile
September 14, 2012, 01:55:48 AM
 #30

It seems to me that u r right. So there is no way to change Bitcoin. Any changes will likely lead to a fork.
Well Bitcoin is what a majority (preferrably a near consensus super majority) say it is.  There already has been one hard fork to the protocol.


There has not been a hard fork to the protocol. (Unless you're talking about the blockchain irrelevant checksumming of the p2p messages). I run several very old nodes in isolation in order to detect attacks that only work against old nodes.

On the subject of the thread: The bitcoin distribution system is brilliant. And even if it was moronic, it can't be changed. Changing it would rightfully undermine every ounce of trust in the system, it would rightfully destroy the value of bitcoin completely. If you want money that can be inflated on a whim, there are plenty of robust government issued currencies.

... and this thread should be deleted because the OP didn't have the curtsey to offer a "No, and the OP is nuts" option. OP, do you still beat your wife?

Bitcoin will not be compromised
julz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092



View Profile
September 14, 2012, 03:11:47 AM
 #31



... and this thread should be deleted because the OP didn't have the curtsey to offer a "No, and the OP is nuts" option. OP, do you still beat your wife?

Whoa, WTF?

Chill.. It's just the traditional loaded question example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question

@electricwings   BM-GtyD5exuDJ2kvEbr41XchkC8x9hPxdFd
FreeMoney
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


Strength in numbers


View Profile WWW
September 14, 2012, 03:26:28 AM
 #32



... and this thread should be deleted because the OP didn't have the curtsey to offer a "No, and the OP is nuts" option. OP, do you still beat your wife?

Whoa, WTF?

Chill.. It's just the traditional loaded question example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question


And we're all waiting to hear. Come on OP, avoiding the question?

Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.
Etlase2
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798


View Profile
September 14, 2012, 03:39:37 AM
 #33

There has not been a hard fork to the protocol. (Unless you're talking about the blockchain irrelevant checksumming of the p2p messages).

what about the 184 billion bitcoins?

Come-from-Beyond
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1778

Newbie


View Profile
September 14, 2012, 05:29:25 AM
 #34

I got a weak point of my poll - it's too early for it. Most part of respondents hold their coins waiting for 1000$ price, they won't support anything but Satoshi's plan. But in few years a lot of ppl will come into Bitcoin world. They won't have motives to follow the plan and could change things completely...
Come-from-Beyond
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1778

Newbie


View Profile
September 14, 2012, 05:38:49 AM
 #35



... and this thread should be deleted because the OP didn't have the curtsey to offer a "No, and the OP is nuts" option. OP, do you still beat your wife?

Whoa, WTF?

Chill.. It's just the traditional loaded question example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question


And we're all waiting to hear. Come on OP, avoiding the question?

I do still beat my wife. U know, we like to play different sex games...  Grin
FreeMoney
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


Strength in numbers


View Profile WWW
September 14, 2012, 05:55:46 AM
 #36



... and this thread should be deleted because the OP didn't have the curtsey to offer a "No, and the OP is nuts" option. OP, do you still beat your wife?

Whoa, WTF?

Chill.. It's just the traditional loaded question example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question


And we're all waiting to hear. Come on OP, avoiding the question?

I do still beat my wife. U know, we like to play different sex games...  Grin

Oh, ok. You guys want to get together with my wife and I?

Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.
Come-from-Beyond
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1778

Newbie


View Profile
September 14, 2012, 06:05:56 AM
 #37

Oh, ok. You guys want to get together with my wife and I?

Hahaha. Post here ur nu-style photo and we'll think.
johnyj
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834


Beyond Imagination


View Profile
September 14, 2012, 06:51:30 AM
 #38

Either amount of coin get more and value keeps constant, or amount of coin keeps constant and value of BTC constantly rise, obviously current BTC holder like later alternative, and most current BTC holder are those who are supporting/promoting BTC

waspoza
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602


Firstbits: 1waspoza


View Profile
September 14, 2012, 12:55:42 PM
 #39

Not to mention, there is no reason to do it - because there is no need to compensate for lost coins.

There is the never-ending block chain bloat to consider.

As far as I know, lost coins don't increase blockchain size in any way. Only new transactions increase blockchain size.
Etlase2
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798


View Profile
September 14, 2012, 12:58:19 PM
 #40

As far as I know, lost coins don't increase blockchain size in any way. Only new transactions increase blockchain size.

They don't increase the size, but they do nothing productive and are a waste of everyone's resources. As the value of coins rise, and people die or lose coins or whatever, smaller and smaller outputs will be left stuck in the chain never to be redeemed, never to be forgotten.

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

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!