1BR: Should the block reward be 50 BTC for ages?

[DeathAndTaxes]

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.

[1715023468]

1715023468

[1715023468]

1715023468

[1715023468]

1715023468

[Etlase2]

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).  

[Come-from-Beyond]

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).  

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]

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]

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).  

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]

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.

[Etlase2]

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]

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. 

[jjiimm_64]

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!!

[gmaxwell]

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?

[julz]

... 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

[FreeMoney]

... 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?

[Etlase2]

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]

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]

... 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... 

[FreeMoney]

... 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... 

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

[Come-from-Beyond]

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]

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]

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]

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.