HARD LIMIT 21 M MYTH

[jubalix]

This is a myth

at 21M, (and all the smaller units) 0.00000001 whatever

all that happens is a new exchange open that swaps 0.00000001 to a the newBitCoin of the that block chain (that wins out) which has 21 M or whatever and the fees are paid in newBitCoin.

The end

no upper limit on the number you can have, you just boot strap into the next newBitoin

This is happening already with BTC/DVC, LTC  etc etc exchanges

(sort of like your could double execution to make fesable title indefeasible anyway...sorta)

[1715449331]

1715449331

[1715449331]

1715449331

[Cubic Earth]

newBitCoin ≠ BitCoin

[jubalix]

Huh? The Bitcoin client and protocol that I use is not compatible with whatever you are talking about. Those newBitCoin will not be recognized on the original block chain.

no you trade into them

you sell your bitcoins they give you other currency
see

this the first thing I did when I got bitcoins is diversified a portion out to other crypto currencies

https://vircurex.com/welcome/index

[Bitobsessed]

You have no idea what you are spewing...seriously, do not come back, search, then come back.  Goodbye.
EDIT:Ignore
EDIT2:Mod plz move this

[jubalix]

You have no idea what you are spewing...seriously, do not come back, search, then come back.  Goodbye.
EDIT:Ignore
EDIT2:Mod plz move this

Please deconstruct argument,
you should at least try to discuss at a level above ad-hominems, and really need to be in counterargument to be taken seriously
see pyramid,

[jubalix]

Huh? The Bitcoin client and protocol that I use is not compatible with whatever you are talking about. Those newBitCoin will not be recognized on the original block chain.

no you trade into them

you sell your bitcoins they give you other currency
see

this the first thing I did when I got bitcoins is diversified a portion out to other crypto currencies

https://vircurex.com/welcome/index

So, Bitcoins are unlimited because I can trade them for something that isn't Bitcoin?

That's like saying gold is unlimited because I can trade it for silver, yet an ounce of silver is not equivalent to an ounce of gold.

no no, the divisibility of the value of bitcoins is unlimited, your getting stuck on place holders for value rather than value itself...the market does not care if no more bitcoins can be produced if demand is high its value will traded by proxy currency

[jubalix]

Huh? The Bitcoin client and protocol that I use is not compatible with whatever you are talking about. Those newBitCoin will not be recognized on the original block chain.

no you trade into them

you sell your bitcoins they give you other currency
see

this the first thing I did when I got bitcoins is diversified a portion out to other crypto currencies

https://vircurex.com/welcome/index

So, Bitcoins are unlimited because I can trade them for something that isn't Bitcoin?

That's like saying gold is unlimited because I can trade it for silver, yet an ounce of silver is not equivalent to an ounce of gold.

no no, the divisibility of the value of bitcoins is unlimited, your getting stuck on place holders for value rather than value itself...the market does not care if no more bitcoins can be produced if demand is high its value will traded by proxy currency

Why would I accept this proxy currency in place of bitcoins?

you dont have to accept anything

but if it become impractical to deal with the smallest satoshi unit then you go into proxy currecny

thus not upper limit.

[BkkCoins]

It's possible the market could accept something else as a proxy for Bitcoin but just saying it is doesn't make it so. People with bitcoin would have to feel that the proxy has equivalent value and it's hard to see that happening when they are not limited in an equivalent way.

If you said SuperCoin was equal to 1 million Bitcoin and allowed people to buy in at that rate with some kind of SuperCoin guarantee (har har) that they could trade back out at the same rate, then, Yes, you have a point, but who can guarantee that and who would trust it.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

If 21 million million satoshis run out, each satoshi will be divided into another million other units, etc.

[JoelKatz]

but if it become impractical to deal with the smallest satoshi unit then you go into proxy currecny

thus not upper limit.

Your argument is essentially that 21 million is not necessarily the upper limit because if in some distant future Bitcoins were horribly broken somehow, we might create more of them to fix the problem. Sure, that's true. But it's also totally irrelevant. So long as Bitcoins aren't fundamentally broken in some way, 21 million is the limit. And if Bitcoins are fundamentally broken in some distant future, they won't really be anything like what we now know as bitcoins and nobody plans with a time horizon that far anyway. (But it's a plus that should that ever happen, we can fix it.)

[jubalix]

but if it become impractical to deal with the smallest satoshi unit then you go into proxy currecny

thus not upper limit.

Your argument is essentially that 21 million is not necessarily the upper limit because if in some distant future Bitcoins were horribly broken somehow, we might create more of them to fix the problem. Sure, that's true. But it's also totally irrelevant. So long as Bitcoins aren't fundamentally broken in some way, 21 million is the limit. And if Bitcoins are fundamentally broken in some distant future, they won't really be anything like what we now know as bitcoins and nobody plans with a time horizon that far anyway. (But it's a plus that should that ever happen, we can fix it.)

nope.jpg
not my argument at all rather that bitcoins work so well, and to realize thier vaulue the smallest unit can be traded into say 1000 DVC

sighhhhhh so now you have 21 x * 10^3 more effective trading units

[Come-from-Beyond]

If 21 million million satoshis run out, each satoshi will be divided into another million other units, etc.

Do u really believe in this? We r even unable to come to a consensus regarding block size limit...

[Dansker]

I think you are all missing OP's point.

Let us assume the following to be true:

We cannot divide our bitcoins into smaller units, and the smallest units have become unpracticable to use, since their value is too high per unit.

(We are assuming this to be true, it may or may not be true)

Now, let us now assume, that someone (for example the bitcoin foundation) starts bitcoin v. 2.0 using the same technology as bitcoin as we know it, ie. a new blockchain is started. If enough people are willing to accept, that this is "the one" new bitcoin chain, then those who may so desire can buy these new coins at market value.

1 of the smallest units of bitcoin could then maybe buy 100.000 of the smallest unit of bitcoin v. 2.0, and then voila, the problem(remember our initial assumption) is solved.

It would then be like having 1 blockchain for dollars/pounds (bitcoin) and 2 blockchain for cents/pennies.

Will this problem ever arise? Maybe not.

[stillfire]

I think you are all missing OP's point.

...

1 of the smallest units of bitcoin could then maybe buy 100.000 of the smallest unit of bitcoin v. 2.0, and then voila, the problem(remember our initial assumption) is solved.

I don't think anyone is missing that point. Holliday said it: if you think gold is too expensive and you trade it for a larger quantity of grams of silver, that doesn't mean the limits of the amount of gold in the world has now magically changed.

E.g. the "HARD LIMIT 21M" of Bitcoins is not changed by the fact that some people switch to an alt coin, just like how the amount of gold in the world is not changed by how much silver people buy.

[BkkCoins]

Now, let us now assume, that someone (for example the bitcoin foundation) starts bitcoin v. 2.0 using the same technology as bitcoin as we know it, ie. a new blockchain is started. If enough people are willing to accept, that this is "the one" new bitcoin chain, then those who may so desire can buy these new coins at market value.

1 of the smallest units of bitcoin could then maybe buy 100.000 of the smallest unit of bitcoin v. 2.0, and then voila, the problem(remember our initial assumption) is solved.

So in this scenario are we supposed to trust the Foundation that 100 of these new 2.0 coins are worth 1 of the old coins? On what authority? And how do they get generated (by miners or fiat) and by whom? Or would there be a secondary market that establishes the exchange rate? In which case we have that now with several alt coins - though typically they have some altered characteristics.

[Dansker]

Now, let us now assume, that someone (for example the bitcoin foundation) starts bitcoin v. 2.0 using the same technology as bitcoin as we know it, ie. a new blockchain is started. If enough people are willing to accept, that this is "the one" new bitcoin chain, then those who may so desire can buy these new coins at market value.

1 of the smallest units of bitcoin could then maybe buy 100.000 of the smallest unit of bitcoin v. 2.0, and then voila, the problem(remember our initial assumption) is solved.

So in this scenario are we supposed to trust the Foundation that 100 of these new 2.0 coins are worth 1 of the old coins? On what authority? And how do they get generated (by miners or fiat) and by whom? Or would there be a secondary market that establishes the exchange rate? In which case we have that now with several alt coins - though typically they have some altered characteristics.

I would imagine it would all work exactly the same way bitcoin works.

[Gatekeeper]

if this is based on one satoshi becoming to valuable to use for "normal" transactions then i don't think anyone here will care because every person here will be multi millionaires by the time we got anywhere near that point. If one satoshi was not viable to use anymore the value of bitcoin would be insane. If one satoshi was $10,one bitcoin would be $1 billion, so the total value of bitcoin would be 21million x 1 billion lol

not something we need to worry about anytime soon

[Piper67]

What a spectacular waste of time this thread was.

[FlipPro]

end /thread

[DannyHamilton]

Anyone who tries right now to predict what technology will be like and how people will choose to adjust when the last bitcoin is mined is simply ignoring the impossibility of making an accurate prediction.

The last bitcoin will be mined in 136 years.  If you had asked someone in 1877 about there predictions for 2013 on anything technology related, do you really think any of them could even imagine what exists today?