[2018-1-15] Eighty percent of available bitcoins already mined. Now what?

[DowBit]

This weekend was a special time in the cryptocurrency world. 80% of available Bitcoins are in circulation. Thanks to Satoshi Nakamoto, Bitcoin has a limited supply, as well as a protocol which makes it more and more difficult with time. Let’s look at what Nakamoto “snuck” into the code of the most popular cryptocurrency.

Bitcoin miners have mines 16,800,000 BTCs as of 13th of January. When Satoshi Nakamoto developed the cryptocurrency, he set the maximum number of minable Bitcoins at 21 million – no more. However, skeptics say that manipulations in the form of a 51% attack and the Sybil Attack may lead to attempts to increase supply. So far, however, the consensus principle has been effective in defending Bitcoin’s independence. For almost a decade, nobody has managed to break the Bitcoin protocol.

Bitcoin’s limited supply on the market increases demand for the good. We can see how big a gap exists between these two values. Many people believe that this digital shortage will increase the value of Bitcoin in the future.

more: https://dowbit.com/80-bitcoins-mined/

[richardsNY]

I have read certain (mainstream media) articles in the last months where the limited supply has been pointed at as being a negative factor due there "just" being 21 million coins (a tiny bit less in reality) to ever be mined. They completely ignore the fact that Bitcoin by default is an extremely divisible digital asset, where they also ignore the fact that back when the price was just under $1000, a lot people couldn't even afford a whole coin anymore. 21 million Bitcoins is just a GUI nomination. We also have GUI nominations such as mBTC and Bits to work with in the coming years, where these smaller nominations make sure the number of units will increase significantly.

[Hell-raiser]

I have read certain (mainstream media) articles in the last months where the limited supply has been pointed at as being a negative factor due there "just" being 21 million coins (a tiny bit less in reality) to ever be mined. They completely ignore the fact that Bitcoin by default is an extremely divisible digital asset, where they also ignore the fact that back when the price was just under $1000, a lot people couldn't even afford a whole coin anymore. 21 million Bitcoins is just a GUI nomination. We also have GUI nominations such as mBTC and Bits to work with in the coming years, where these smaller nominations make sure the number of units will increase significantly.

What do you mean by GUI nominations here?

While I thoroughly agree with your point that Bitcoin is infinitely divisible, I still see a lot of potential issues in the future if Bitcoin continues to rise as fast as it had been rising in 2017. Right now we have 8 decimal places, and so far it has been more than enough. But what if things change in the future and we would actually need more? Wouldn't that cause a lot of headaches for wallets, exchanges, even blockchain itself when we will be looking to add a few extra decimals?

[squatter]

I have read certain (mainstream media) articles in the last months where the limited supply has been pointed at as being a negative factor due there "just" being 21 million coins (a tiny bit less in reality) to ever be mined. They completely ignore the fact that Bitcoin by default is an extremely divisible digital asset, where they also ignore the fact that back when the price was just under $1000, a lot people couldn't even afford a whole coin anymore. 21 million Bitcoins is just a GUI nomination. We also have GUI nominations such as mBTC and Bits to work with in the coming years, where these smaller nominations make sure the number of units will increase significantly.

I wish people could just learn to use decimal places. Is it really that hard?

I think that the scaling debate and rising fees affect the "unit bias" discussion. As it is, using the "bits" denomination seems pointless, since it can take thousands of "bits" just to cover transaction fees on median-sized transactions. What's the point? And don't even get me started on the merits -- or lack thereof -- of BIP176....

Smaller units will make sense when Lightning Network use is mainstream and people don't need the entire network to validate their transactions. Until then, I think this sort of sentiment will remain common. In other words, I think this is a transition period where people will continue to focus on the BTC unit, and many newcomers still won't understand that you can buy a fraction of a coin.