If you belive that Bitcoin is over and done with...

[MajorMiner]

Put your "money" where your mouth is and send your Bitcoin to me   .

 

THOUGHT SO!

[the founder]

We're still printing them at a quarter million bitcoins a month,  even if they are worth .00001 cent each. 

If someone can logically answer why there is no mechanism to slow down the rate of printing then I want to hear it.

[evolve]

if you think bitcoins will reach $100 or whatever, i will gladly sell you all of mine for that price instead of the shit price they are going for now.

thought so.

the argument works both ways, man




i dont think btc is "over" but i also dont think its going to be recovering any time soon...

[arsenische]

We're still printing them at a quarter million bitcoins a month,  even if they are worth .00001 cent each. 

If someone can logically answer why there is no mechanism to slow down the rate of printing then I want to hear it.

There is such a mechanism.  216000 btc per month is not that much, it is less than 3%. And this percentage decreases every month.

[bitlotto]

If someone can logically answer why there is no mechanism to slow down the rate of printing then I want to hear it.

Because Satoshi Nakamoto didn't add that feature and changing the rules of the entire system that existed since the beginning will upset many people who don't want the rules changed.

[Anonymous]

Put your "money" where your mouth is and send your Bitcoin to me 1APr8KyR379soKSCAciZJV2TKUnxnpxmPA .

 

THOUGHT SO!

Please show me your most recent buy order from any other currency.

[the founder]

If someone can logically answer why there is no mechanism to slow down the rate of printing then I want to hear it.

Because Satoshi Nakamoto didn't add that feature and changing the rules of the entire system that existed since the beginning will upset many people who don't want the rules changed.

then you just pointed out the biggest flaw in the bitcoin algorithm.

Even the US constitution has a mechanism to add or remove items from it..   IE: change the rules.

It's reaching the point where a few of the mining pools might make the decision for us if this continues....

They would rather get 2 BTC per block at 50 dollars... rather than 50 BTC at 2 BTC. Because the amount they have sitting on their machines now would increase as well.    Trust me I did the math.

If they reduced the payout to 2 BTC and the price did jump up... it would increase the amount of dollar per BTC for the 100,000 of them they have on their machine...  

[tvbcof]

Because Satoshi Nakamoto didn't add that feature and changing the rules of the entire system that existed since the beginning will upset many people who don't want the rules changed.

then you just pointed out the biggest flaw in the bitcoin algorithm.

Even the US constitution has a mechanism to add or remove items from it..   IE: change the rules.

Hi didn't?  I disagree.  He put the codebase under MIT licensing.  Just get a majority of users to switch and you can have anything you like.

---

Parenthetically, I see this 'new rules by software upgrade' as one of the enormous advantages if Bitcoin.  If the system is abused beyond a certain level, there is a 'nuclear option' available to the community as a democratic institution.  This is _not_ an option with gold as a store of value.

Carrying on this thought a bit more, it seems to me that if a large mining pool somehow held together long enough to maliciously destroy the currency, _that_ would be enough to convince a majority of users to 'upgrade' their software to a version which would ignore a malicious block chain fork and 'recover' albeit with some collateral damage.

[defxor]

If someone can logically answer why there is no mechanism to slow down the rate of printing then I want to hear it.

Because it's irrelevant?

[BitcoinBug]

We're still printing them at a quarter million bitcoins a month,  even if they are worth .00001 cent each.  

If someone can logically answer why there is no mechanism to slow down the rate of printing then I want to hear it.

At price 10$ with all miners regularly selling, buyers have to put 2.16 million USD a month to keep the price stable. 1.08 million USD for 5$/BTC and 216k USD a month for stable 1$/BTC. PRICE is the mechanism, not printing rate!

[BubbleBoy]

If someone can logically answer why there is no mechanism to slow down the rate of printing then I want to hear it.

Because there's no need for it. The market is efficient and will reach an equilibrium value of BTC that acknowledges the large liquidity infused each day by mining.

But wait, a large herd of people approach and they are yelling "buy Bitcoins, we'll all be rich !". The price spikes to a level that can't possibly be maintained against the daily liquidity injection of 7200BTC. I guess markets aren't that efficient after all, and occasionally fall pray to a speculative bubble. There's a quick fix: the price has to fall back to it's natural level, dictated by net cash inflows into the system. Luckily, The Designer made it all automatic, you don't have do anything, except loose money if you are one of the balloonists.

In short is not the rate of printing that's too high, it's the price.

[the founder]

Because it's irrelevant?

No man... it's not irrelevant...  it's the basis of the entire experiment.    If it falls to pennies or lower... it's game over for all of us...   We have two choices at this time.

1 - Exponentially increase the market size,  get VC money into bitcoin companies, widen the adoption rate of bitcoins to exceed $1.5 million a month of investment,  and trading of BTC.  (that's the figure that would have kept prices stable at $6 per BTC) 

2 - slow down the rate of printing.

Pick one or both...  it's not like any of us have any other options if we want BTC to survive.   Facts are facts man... and the fact is that BTC will hit the point of no return if one or both of the above or not done.   There really are no other options as it MUST be one or the two...  the option 3 is do nothing and watch it go to the wrong side of critical mass.

[rezin777]

Even the US constitution has a mechanism to add or remove items from it..   IE: change the rules.

How's that working out for them?

From my limited experience, people who want to change the rules are trying to change them in their favor.

Isn't the market rule enough? If you think Bitcoins are worth more than the current price, buy. If you don't, sell. What's the problem?

[nighteyes]

then you just pointed out the biggest flaw in the bitcoin algorithm.
Even the US constitution has a mechanism to add or remove items from it..   IE: change the rules.

You get 50%+1 then you can make whatever rules you want....so.....its up to you.
Personally, I would strongly disagree that its a problem.Maybe you forgot it was just a few months ago where people were saying the 'printing' was too slow!

This is a vote of no confidence.....which makes sense. Perhaps one day, people will wake up to that and reorganize.
You are suggesting that, par for the course for most bitcoiners, you dont want to do any work and have others do the work for you. Well, Im not going for that, and it looks like not many are either.

My vote is against the Mr. "what have you done for me lately" Satoshis , the "pie in the sky/koolaid" scammer Bruce Wagners, the idiotic lets exchange USD for BTC for USD crowd..and all of the rest of the ideas that do nothing for the long-term bitcoin picture.

[smoothie]

Yeah instead of cashing out your bitcoins guys just send em to the OP. He will definitely take them off of your hands.

What a stupid proposition for people to do if they believe bitcoin is over with.

[evoorhees]

Because it's irrelevant?

No man... it's not irrelevant...  it's the basis of the entire experiment.    If it falls to pennies or lower... it's game over for all of us...   We have two choices at this time.

1 - Exponentially increase the market size,  get VC money into bitcoin companies, widen the adoption rate of bitcoins to exceed $1.5 million a month of investment,  and trading of BTC.  (that's the figure that would have kept prices stable at $6 per BTC) 

2 - slow down the rate of printing.

Pick one or both...  it's not like any of us have any other options if we want BTC to survive.   Facts are facts man... and the fact is that BTC will hit the point of no return if one or both of the above or not done.   There really are no other options as it MUST be one or the two...  the option 3 is do nothing and watch it go to the wrong side of critical mass.

The rate of printing coins is one of those constants that, if tampered with, would undermine confidence in the entire protocol. Very bad idea to even think of tinkering with such a thing. The market price is the variable, and the market decides what it will do.

And suppose the price started rising rapidly, would it then make sense to increase the speed of coin printing? No.

The market price of Bitcoin is what it is. We ought not try to "tinker" with the rules just to hold it higher than the market otherwise prefers.

To anyone who believes in Bitcoin, a falling price is a godsend opportunity to acquire more. It certainly does not indicate that the core constants of the protocol ought to be messed with.

[the founder]

Even the US constitution has a mechanism to add or remove items from it..   IE: change the rules.

How's that working out for them?

From my limited experience, people who want to change the rules are trying to change them in their favor.

Isn't the market rule enough? If you think Bitcoins are worth more than the current price, buy. If you don't, sell. What's the problem?

THANK YOU!  You just proved my point!!!   if the price goes to almost nothing... it's not the sellers that are the problem.. it's the buyers.   So the market will do exactly what it's supposed to do.. shut down non-functioning parts... such as bitcoin.

[lemonginger]

No man... it's not irrelevant...  it's the basis of the entire experiment.    If it falls to pennies or lower... it's game over for all of us... 

Why?

Either bitcoins have use as a currency, in which case they can be used at any price and gradually greater use will equal a higher price or they have use as a pump and dump get rich quick scheme, in which case yes they are doomed.

[evoorhees]

You get 50%+1 then you can make whatever rules you want....so.....its up to you.

False. Having +1 over 50% does not grant you title like that. This is a common misconception. Rather, the more of the hashing power one controls, the more likely it is that he/she can fork the blockchain and alter things. It's a gradient with a focal point at the 50% mark... but the 50% mark is not a guarantee of takeover.

[nighteyes]

You get 50%+1 then you can make whatever rules you want....so.....its up to you.

False. Having +1 over 50% does not grant you title like that. This is a common misconception. Rather, the more of the hashing power one controls, the more likely it is that he/she can fork the blockchain and alter things. It's a gradient with a focal point at the 50% mark... but the 50% mark is not a guarantee of takeover.

Thanks for correcting me on that. It was a bad strategy anyway the more I think about it. Better to think the mechanism is to adopt another cryptocurrency or get invloved in world govts. The thing about changing it is we end up with the US dollar in the long run.