ronenfe (OP)
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 19
Merit: 0
|
 |
February 18, 2013, 10:45:17 PM |
|
between all the people?
I don't see the reason why a few people who were the first could gain a big share of the coins and people who want to buy coins now have to pay for them. and why would people will cooperate with such system.
I mean I only heard about this today, I would participate earlier if I knew about it.
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Christ
aka snapsunny
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1003
|
|
February 18, 2013, 10:47:17 PM |
|
They took a much bigger risk. There are lots of currencies beside the gov-issued which fall through and subsequently become mostly worthless. It's like investing. Those people saw the potential and put their money where their respective mouths were. To give that up because more people are jumping on the bandwagon now that Bitcoin has better proven itself wouldn't be very fair.
|
|
|
|
ronenfe (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 19
Merit: 0
|
|
February 18, 2013, 10:50:43 PM |
|
what risk did they take? they got it for free.
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Christ
aka snapsunny
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1003
|
|
February 18, 2013, 10:53:26 PM |
|
They either bought the coins for cheap, or spent the time and money to mine them. And there was no guarantee bitcoin would ever become anything. It could've flopped and then, nothing. They're being rewarded for believing in it while others said it was silly and would never work. There's no right or wrong to it. It's just the luck of the draw.
|
|
|
|
20max13
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 49
Merit: 0
|
|
February 18, 2013, 10:56:40 PM |
|
That sounds like a great idea comrade!  |
|
|
|
|
|
Severian
|
|
February 18, 2013, 10:59:58 PM |
|
between all the people?
I don't see the reason why a few people who were the first could gain a big share of the coins
They coded and built the early version of Bitcoin. When any of us can create a cryptocurrency from scratch and then bootstrap it into existence, we'd also have a right to the fruits of our labors. Lose the envy and do what you can to get some bitcoins. It's still a wide open game. |
|
|
|
|
haitispaceagency
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 252
Merit: 250
Coinlancer.io ICO | Oct 14th
|
|
February 18, 2013, 11:00:50 PM |
|
You should write a manifesto with your comrades
|
|
|
|
Evolyn
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 376
Merit: 312
Can you say... nighty-night?
|
|
February 18, 2013, 11:02:28 PM |
|
Wouldn't it be more fair if [insert whatever you want] were shared equally?
between all the people?
Yes and No.
Yes, if everyone insert the same amount of risk, work, money, time, ...
Otherwise just no.
|
Forex meets Bitcoin Exchange: Release the Kraken
|
|
|
Milkshake
Member
Offline
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
Milkshake
|
|
February 18, 2013, 11:02:50 PM |
|
|
TradeFortress has left me negative trust and has provided no proof to substantiate his claim. He has done this to discredit me as I am investigating him.
|
|
|
|
nobbynobbynoob
|
|
February 18, 2013, 11:04:17 PM |
|
Probably wouldn't be worse than the other Russky scamcoins going on down.  |
|
|
|
|
debianlinux
|
|
February 18, 2013, 11:04:25 PM |
|
I mined BTC back in 2010 and laughed it off as a complete waste of computational power. I like the idea but figured it was not viable.
I was proven wrong, as I have been wrong on many things and will again real soon I am sure.
The difference between me an OP is that I don't expect to be compensated for being wrong or just plain ignorant.
|
|
|
|
|
ProfMac
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1001
|
|
February 18, 2013, 11:06:15 PM
Last edit: February 18, 2013, 11:30:18 PM by ProfMac |
|
between all the people?
I don't see the reason why a few people who were the first could gain a big share of the coins and people who want to buy coins now have to pay for them. and why would people will cooperate with such system.
I mean I only heard about this today, I would participate earlier if I knew about it.
This is pretty much the guns and gold crowd. They won't share bitcoins. It doesn't matter if sharing would make a better world or not. I grew up in Dallas and have lots of experience with this mindset. Trust me, I'm a doctor. |
I try to be respectful and informed.
|
|
|
Mike Christ
aka snapsunny
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1003
|
|
February 18, 2013, 11:08:47 PM |
|
If you mean, by sharing, spending, that would be great!
But if you mean sharing as in, giving away, ehh probably not gonna happen.
|
|
|
|
Kettenmonster
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 420
Merit: 250
bool eval(bool b){return b ? b==true : b==false;}
|
|
February 18, 2013, 11:09:38 PM |
|
More fair for whom?
|
The paining (sic!) is done with the QPainter class inside the paintEvent() method.
(source: my internet)
|
|
|
|
Beepbop
|
|
February 18, 2013, 11:19:00 PM |
|
There's not really a good reason for mining being so profitable in the beginning - I think that was an unintended consequence, as was the giant mining rigs, ASICs, etc.
It makes more sense when you consider that miners process peoples' transactions. Just like Western Union takes a bit of money to help you send money, those who process transactions get paid for their services. They also get paid for helping to secure the network. Those reasons make sense more than the early mining bit.
It's a good question - why should anyone who isn't a bitcoiner already be expected to give anything of value in exchange for Bitcoin. I could just as well have declared that my used underwear is a currency and try paying for groceries with them.
What makes Bitcoin have value now is that they actually can be used for buying stuff. There is a bitcoin economy. Without a bitcoin economy a BTC would be almost worthless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Luno
|
|
February 18, 2013, 11:22:09 PM |
|
Bitcoin was distributed equally and easy for everyone to get if they cared exactly for that reason.
So the former hippie-nerd currency that was given to friends for free in the thousands, is something else now!
In a funny way, you disclose you own interest in Bitcoin by your suggestion. You wan't to get rich, so what? If you cared about the solutions Bitcoin provide, you would had noticed it earlier.
I think very few, if any of the early adoptors imagined that Bitcoin would be worth a lot of money one day. They did it for fun and ideology.
Bitcoin is not a better idea now because a Bitcoin is worth more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
xxjs
|
|
February 18, 2013, 11:22:57 PM |
|
In theory it would be possible to start out with every individual a share of the total of bitcoins. Problem is, in that case the idea, both of the technology and the limited supply, must have been agreed upon in advance. I don't see how that possibly could be true.
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Christ
aka snapsunny
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1003
|
|
February 18, 2013, 11:26:07 PM |
|
Find precious orangey-yellow metal
Mine for four years
"Hey that's not fair, you should share it with everyone!"
"Why?"
"Because it's shiny and I want it."
|
|
|
|
|
Beepbop
|
|
February 18, 2013, 11:26:47 PM |
|
Are you saying that four years from now, if someone says they've just discovered bitcoin and are upset that they missed out on four years of opportunity to acquire it cheaper, you'll donate half of your bitcoin to them because sharing will make a better world?
If you're hoarding something that you want the rest of the world to accept as a medium exchange, it actually would make sense to distribute it around a bit. Maybe by lottery and other types of gifting, and perhaps paying people for services with it. If I declare that my used underwear is now the currency of the future, it would have a higher chance of success if I'd already distributed it around the world and even promised to provide certain services or goods in exhcange for them. Find precious orangey-yellow metal
Mine for four years
"Hey that's not fair, you should share it with everyone!"
"Why?"
"Because it's shiny and I want it."
 |
|
|
|
|
ronenfe (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 19
Merit: 0
|
|
February 19, 2013, 12:15:37 AM |
|
Well, when you create a system from scratch it should be created fairly. they could also get 99% of the wealth and leave the 1 percent for the rest, would you still agree with that?
And people here talking about communism are mistaken. I'm talking about an equal starting point.
I know it may not be practical, but maybe it could have been thought.
It's like when you play monopoly, you give each one same amount of money.
So from what I understand the system is based on the idea that the earlier you start mining the richer you are going to be? and it decays exponentially?
|
|
|
|
|
|
