People complaining about how hard it is to generate

[grondilu]

I am amazed by the number of people (most of them being newbies) who complain about how difficult it is to obtain some bitcoins.  Bitcoin is a money, so what did they expect  ?  Did they think they would just start the program and that bitcoin would just magically generate money ??   How valuable would be bitcoins in that case ??


It's perfectly normal that the casual user have difficulties generating any single bitcoin.  A casual user uses a very common machine, such as mine, a laptop with a Intel 1.6GHz processor.  Obviously, if it was easy to generate bitcoins with such a machine, then there would be something wrong with the whole cryptocurrency concept.  To me, it does make sense that only state-of-the-art machines can generate bitcoins.


Is that unfair ?  I don't think so.  Not at all.  Anyone who really wants to own bitcoins can just buy some.  There's nothing wrong if some effort is required to obtain something.  Whether this effort is technical (acquiring and running powerful machines) or financial.

[1714783422]

1714783422

[1714783422]

1714783422

[1714783422]

1714783422

[1714783422]

1714783422

[1714783422]

1714783422

[Macho]

Yeah, that's like complaining about dollars because you can't easily print some more whenever you want

Maybe it was a strategic mistake to advertise that property of the bitcoin system to newcomers as a way to obtain bitcoins, the truth is that the majority will not generate bitcoins nor is it desirable that they would. It's supposed to be a medium of exchange, not a mining game ...

[Aqualung]

Yeah, that's like complaining about dollars because you can't easily print some more whenever you want

but those people who print dollars are not taking it for themselves. So it's a little unfair to give most of coins to people with powerfull machines.

[grondilu]

but those people who print dollars are not taking it for themselves. So it's a little unfair to give most of coins to people with powerfull machines.

People who print money do it with no effort whatsoever, and there is no limit to their greed.

On the contrary, bitcoin miners are just extracting something which exist in a limited amount anyway.  As it has been said many times, it's just the same for gold.  Can't blame someone because he has found some gold in a river, or because he decided to spend some time there looking for some.


Seriously, mining is a perfectly respectable activity.  And there is no unfairness in it, since anyone can do it if he really wants to.  Powerfull machines are not a priviledge.  Anybody can buy one.

[ribuck]

I am amazed by the number of people (most of them being newbies) who complain about how difficult it is to obtain some bitcoins.

All one needs to say to these people is: "If it was easy, the coins would be worthless".

Unfortunately a large proportion of the population have been brought up to believe that wealth is some kind of fixed universal quantity that is "distributed", rather than something that can be created by work.

[caveden]

but those people who print dollars are not taking it for themselves.

Of course they are.
The state not only uses the dollar printers in order to manipulate the interest rates for their demagogic purposes, but they also use it as a financing source, since the debt bounds that expire in the hands of the Fed aren't payed off by the Treasury. They do finance their activities through the printing of money.

[FlyingMoose]

Anyone who really wants to own bitcoins can just buy some.

I think you should re-read some of the complaints.  It's become very difficult to get USD into the system to buy bitcoins since no one accepts credit cards or paypal to buy them.

[RHorning]

Yeah, that's like complaining about dollars because you can't easily print some more whenever you want

Maybe it was a strategic mistake to advertise that property of the bitcoin system to newcomers as a way to obtain bitcoins, the truth is that the majority will not generate bitcoins nor is it desirable that they would. It's supposed to be a medium of exchange, not a mining game ...

I believe it was a massive mistake, at least the way it was expressed with some of the early posts even on this forum.  I've seen some posts full of contempt for the newcomers.

The Bitcoin faucet was a good early source of getting some bitcoins to at least play around with the concept, and I'm glad that at least somebody saw that need.  Unfortunately, if that is the only input that can be trusted for bitcoins, it is rather weak.

Anyone who really wants to own bitcoins can just buy some.

I think you should re-read some of the complaints.  It's become very difficult to get USD into the system to buy bitcoins since no one accepts credit cards or paypal to buy them.

Amen on that point too!  Excluding Americans from participating in the system, which is what this implies, is ignoring a huge early market for Bitcoins.  The legal issues surrounding alternative currencies in America have been discussed extensively on other threads, including potential problems with converting dollars to Bitcoins and the other way around.

While there may be many who trust the current exchanges within the Bitcoin community, they are all very new ideas themselves and certainly haven't established credibility with the general public.  That is going to take time.

On the whole, this is something that eventually will work out of the system as people begin to understand the concept as a whole,  It also takes coming up with other ways to both obtain and spend bitcoins.

[Anonymous]

I think a free market approach to gpu envy can be found. There must be some bitcoiners who have empty slots in their computers but cant afford to buy a new graphics card to fill it. There are also bitcoiners who want to get in on the gpu action but dont want to outlay for an entire computer system. So why dont those with empty gpu slots advertise the fact and people can buy a gpu to fill the empty spot and then share any bitcoins generated with that card?

This might be unfeasible given the trust issues involved , but could one of the existing big miners offer this as a service? Let people buy them gpu cards and in return earn bitcoins?

Can you monitor each gpu to know if it was the one that created a block?

Is there a business model in hosting peoples gpu's? I know if I could just buy the gpu , hire a slot , and not have to buy the entire computer system - it would be great!

[nelisky]

For all of us Europeans, does anyone know if a wire transfer using IBAN + swift is possible without receiver name? Someone, myself maybe, could allow wire to bitcoins, and maybe even find a way to do wire to mtgox. PayPal (sucks) could be used to transfer to and from mtgox, I'm sure, if a single trusted entity is used instead of mtgox having to deal with chargebacks and such from multiple users.

If done at low volume it should not be a legal problem and it would serve to help getting users into bitcoin. I wouldn't see this growing to a full blown exchange service without the legalities being solved, though, so just a "bandaid" solution for the time being?

[Gavin Andresen]

I'm a "bleeding heart libertarian."  When I was young and naive I was "progressive/liberal," but now that I'm old and wise (or maybe just more cynical) I have a much greater respect for the positive incentives built-in to private markets, and the negative incentives built-in to government.

So I'm very sympathetic to the "it isn't fair that people with the fastest/most GPUs generate more bitcoins" point of view.

I agree that it would be more fair if every person started with an equal number of bitcoins.  Work harder than average or provide a service that people value and you'd end up with more than you started with.  Otherwise, you'd get bitcoin poor.

But I don't see a way to do that without some central authority deciding who is, and who is not, a 'person'.  And I'm old and cynical enough to think that if there WAS a central authority making that decision, that central authority would very quickly devolve into a corrupt, favor-granting, power-grabbing institution.

"Oh, I'm sorry Mr. Andresen, for the Good of the System we are delaying the granting of your second child's Bitcoin Bounty until they have completed the mandatory consumer education classes, registered to vote, and have completed the voluntary 250 hours of America Freedom:Works! projects that they were assigned."

If you've got a brilliant, fool-proof, decentralized way of solving the identity problem, speak up!  That'd be an even bigger breakthrough than bitcoin.

[MoonShadow]

I'm a "bleeding heart libertarian."  When I was young and naive I was "progressive/liberal," but now that I'm old and wise (or maybe just more cynical) I have a much greater respect for the positive incentives built-in to private markets, and the negative incentives built-in to government.

I pretty much came to libertarianism by a similar path.  I was once a Green, and once an elector for the Democratic Convention of my state.  Attend one of those just once, and you will forever be rid of the illusion of democracy.

I agree that it would be more fair if every person started with an equal number of bitcoins. 

Everyone does start off with an equal number of bitcoins, we all start of with zero.

[ByteCoin]

I agree that it would be more fair if every person started with an equal number of bitcoins. 

Everyone does start off with an equal number of bitcoins; we all start off with zero.

Brilliant!

ByteCoin

[grondilu]

I agree that it would be more fair if every person started with an equal number of bitcoins.

Everyone does start off with an equal number of bitcoins; we all start off with zero.

Brilliant!

Brilliant, indeed.

[RHorning]

I agree that it would be more fair if every person started with an equal number of bitcoins. 

Everyone does start off with an equal number of bitcoins, we all start of with zero.

Hardly brilliant, and misses the point.

The issue is how to jump-start the economy and get the basic economic unit flowing around.  In order to do that, there has to be some means to earn the coins in at least some fashion.

Yes, I know there are multiple ways of doing that including simply getting a pile of money and buying them on the exchanges, but that isn't using Bitcoins as money, that is merely using Bitcoins as a transport medium, sort of like a variation of PayPal.  Bitcoins can and to me ought to be so much more than that.

If most people have zero Bitcoins, they simply won't be buying stuff with it.  On the other hand, if they have a few bitcoins (not a lot, but some) then if somebody comes up with some crazy idea that might earn them a few bitcoins, at least somebody has a few to spare that they would be willing to try out the idea.

On the other hand, if Bitcoins are hoarded in the hands of just a few, then it is possible that the new idea will fall flat on its face because nobody is willing to try the idea out, and those who have the pile of money don't want it.  I'm not saying that most of the money concentrated in the hands of a few is a bad thing, I'm just saying that something must be in the hands of many people, even if it is just a very little bit.

Distributing the creation of new bitcoins a little more widely is something that on the whole helps everybody, which is the point I'm trying to drive home.  It is also the source of the complaints here.  I don't think it is envy (for the most part) that these folks are missing out on the bulk of the new coins being mined, but rather the inability to even get into the game in the first place, or wondering if the software even works at all.

[anarchy]

You get born without money in your pocket.  The way bitcoin is now is perfect.

[grondilu]

On the other hand, if Bitcoins are hoarded in the hands of just a few, then it is possible that the new idea will fall flat on its face because nobody is willing to try the idea out, and those who have the pile of money don't want it.  I'm not saying that most of the money concentrated in the hands of a few is a bad thing, I'm just saying that something must be in the hands of many people, even if it is just a very little bit.

Basically what you are saying could be said about the very concept of money itself, not just bitcoins.  Discussing about this would lead us to discussing about communism vs liberalism.  This is a debate that goes far beyond bitcoins.

[ByteCoin]

The issue is how to jump-start the economy and get the basic economic unit flowing around.  In order to do that, there has to be some means to earn the coins in at least some fashion.

At the risk of provoking an economics argument, I think that economies are driven by people having supplies and demands that they wish to match up with other people's demands and supplies respectively. The money is just a means of facilitating this. The problem with Bitcoin is that the current monetary system performs this function very effectively and the reason why there's not more Bitcoin activity is that there's not a persuasive reason to engage in it.

If you look at other e-currencies like egold, you can see this effect in action. The illegal money-laundering side of the economy gravitated towards egold because unlike the normal financial system, egold didn't actively discourage it.

So in order to "jump start" the Bitcoin economy you need some application that it can satisfy better than the normal monetary system. Preferably you need an application that isn't arguably illegal or the "authorities" will come down on it like a tonne of bricks regardless of its actual legality - mark my words.
Anyway, that application is not micropayments; Bitcoin isn't good at that. It's not full anonymity either as payments are at best pseudonymous. Nor is it instant irrevocable payments as they take time to confirm.

I think Bitcoin is at the moment and implementation in search of an application. The greatest rewards for using it have so far been intelectual and to me it has the flavour of something released into the wild as an experiment.

ByteCoin

[S3052]

"customer is boss"
If there are many complaints, we better take them into account

[grondilu]

"customer is boss"
If there are many complaints, we better take them into account

A customer is a customer only if he buys.

People who complain about how difficult it is to generate don't buy any bitcoins, almost per definition.

So we can't consider them as "customers".