Satoshi's original idea...

[franky1]

eventually, this should discourage mining and difficulty should adjust downwards as miners shut down. the cost of mining would therefore drop as well. that's why it doesn't make much sense to focus on the current cost of mining: it adjusts upwards and downwards based on speculation and profitability.

Except the price has done nothing but go down during 2018, and the mining difficulty has increased several fold. There seems to be very little correlation between the two, at least this year. If anything its been an inverse correlation.

price is not value, value is not price
if you cut the november 2017 march 2018 mountain away. you will think differently about the chicken and egg game
in november 2017 when prices hit the $5800 flatline.
mining was cheaper.. it has taken many many months for mining to catch up.. until the last couple months the majority of 'cheap mining' is not exceeding the bottomline flatline value of $5800 and so now things have shifted. and value will rise now that people will start to see mining is not profitable compared to last year.

this has taken time due to S9 asics moving from near $3k each to $440 each which has kept mining 'cheap' while hashpower rose. but like i said things platoo'd and now switching

Plus to make some people angry. Bitcoin is not peer to peer. It is a broadcast network. Lightning is peer to peer, it literally sends transactions from one peer to another.

yea i laugh too. i was wondering when he and his friends would jump in to advertise the separate network. kind of a shame that he shamelessly promotes it but yet to understand what he promotes, so i under stand why you laugh at him.
typical PR wannabe. saying bitcoin is not bitcoin but this other network that is not even a blockchain is more bitcoin than bitcoin... (facepalm) im kinda waiting for when the penny drops and he learns what chainhash means in context of a not a pure bitcoin feature. and he learns about the 12 decimal transactions to realise its not bitcoin.. but, i tried hinting
now its left for him to just work it out for himself.

may he soon will learn about routing. may he will learn about needing to be online to receive funds. needing watchtowers and factories. needing middle men services to serve cell apps. but im guessing like his friends they will just spend 2 years in cabin fever and just talk amungst themselves to just self promote the little PR stuff they have

[EmmaBen]

"The cost of mediation increases transaction costs, limiting the minimum practical transaction size and cutting off the possibility for small casual transactions, and there is a broader cost in the loss of ability to make non-reversible payments for nonreversible
services."

The above quote is perhaps the most believable proof that he was perhaps also worried about the inability of the poor masses to fully adopt the technology because of transaction costs which would bar them from most minimum possible p2p transfers. This indicates that he actually wanted a decentralised global financial tool for the least possible kind of transactions which is really possible for the "underprivileged", giving them complete charge over their own finances.

[franky1]

"The cost of mediation increases transaction costs, limiting the minimum practical transaction size and cutting off the possibility for small casual transactions, and there is a broader cost in the loss of ability to make non-reversible payments for nonreversible
services."

The above quote is perhaps the most believable proof that he was perhaps also worried about the inability of the poor masses to fully adopt the technology because of transaction costs which would bar them from most minimum possible p2p transfers. This indicates that he actually wanted a decentralised global financial tool for the least possible kind of transactions which is really possible for the "underprivileged", giving them complete charge over their own finances.

yea which is why many detest how devs have PURPOSEFULLY put a hold on innovating bitcoin for bitcoins sake. and instead only twisted bitcoin to be compatible for other networks of convenience which would require authorisations and fee's away from the blockchain

[Sonaile]

I remember reading this several years ago... My thought, as when first reading On the Origin of Species, The Law, and other great works: "what a fucking genius" 

[ttking]

I consider Satoshi a very smart man who has managed to make a revolution. To my mind, it is a man who has given us the future that will never be the same. BTC is the coin that has changed the world of currency forever

[DooMAD]

its the developers who code the rules you should be concerned about.

No it isn't.  You just need to stop being paranoid about them.

yea which is why many detest how devs have PURPOSEFULLY put a hold on innovating bitcoin for bitcoins sake.

Many idiots, maybe.  Real innovations don't merely involve tinkering with a few static variables and pretending that's somehow going to solve all the problems.  Surely if innovation was on hold, someone would be able to come up with something better?  If you think there's more innovative code out there, would you care to point us to it?  

[franky1]

its the developers who code the rules you should be concerned about.

No it isn't.  You just need to stop being paranoid about them.

yea which is why many detest how devs have PURPOSEFULLY put a hold on innovating bitcoin for bitcoins sake.

Many idiots, maybe.  Real innovations don't merely involve tinkering with a few static variables and pretending that's somehow going to solve all the problems.  Surely if innovation was on hold, someone would be able to come up with something better?  If you think there's more innovative code out there, would you care to point us to it?  

i ofcourse expected the usual plan of windfury, doomad, (lauda, carlton and achowe*) to start the usual cabin fever core fan club defense of sling insults and repeat pretending to know nothing.. but thats an old astroturf of 2 years ago..
yea you poke the bear and plead ignorant to the poke until you get a bit and then act like your victims.. but oh well..
*(yet to jump in to protect there buddies)

there has literally been hundreds of proposals. over many years but they never get passed the cabin of core dev moderators that only want to follow their own roadmap, and not actually be open to diverse community consensus.

i know you dislike me highlighting things. but when the developers(people) actually highlight issues themselves. i find it very funny how you defend them(people) as it they are perfect and didnt say what they said, an instead think its the network thats broke and limited itself. as if the network is an AI that chose to become stagnant and capped itself.. and suddenly needs commercial services and other networks to function instead.(inshort i laugh you think devs dont control the code..)

i really hope you have gone and took some time to learn the subtle hints i gave and actually have something substantial to offer. rather that just slinging insults

maybe instead of trying to dismiss history that can be found in the blockchain and in code. to protect devs. actually realise its the devs screaming out these things so they dont need your protection.
you are not helping them or bitcoin. you just seem to end up looking like wanting to cause an argument just for some soap opera entertainment.

go learn about the buzzwords discussed in other topics and learn the source of those concerns. if you have not got the hints in other topics. stop asking. because you seem to not want to be spoonfed

[Rumble97]

Surely Satoshi is a very smart person, from him born bitcoin, which is now widely known by people and has changed a lot in terms of income, bitcoin until now is still the top coin crypto and coin no one can beat it

[rose9696]

But the original purpose of Satoshi is now gone. The darker parts of society have changed it and are taking advantage of Bitcoin. I think Bitcoin will take longer to become famous and be the most valuable currency without these dark components. Anyway, that's a great exchange.

[Kakmakr]

He definitely targeted the Banks, because we know he pointed to a news article in the newspapers where a second Bailout for Banks was announced, when he first launched Bitcoin.

I think his idea was to provide for a alternative payment option for people who wanted to move away from centralized financial institutions. Satoshi figured that a decentralized system will be a much better solution than the corrupt Banking and other centralized payment systems, like PayPal. 

Once payment processors and regulated exchanges entered, this concept failed miserably for the people using these services. 

[Ucy]

From what I have read I think he was concerned about :
- Censorship
- Privacy violation.
- Currency manipulation
- Currency Inflation (seen mostly on his Bitcointalk Comments)
- Centralized currency

In summary, he want a currency run in a decentralized fashion, used Peer-to-peer and difficult to control by an individual, government, company or central group.

[redsap]

yeah indeed, satoshi make this because wanting to pressed the transaction system in the world that are dominant from the bank, and long time process also this good tech can being development to make a change in economic system after all

[bangkit tri]

yeah indeed, satoshi make this because wanting to pressed the transaction system in the world that are dominant from the bank, and long time process also this good tech can being development to make a change in economic system after all

besides aiming for business, i think satoshi found bitcoin for a more effective transaction in current and future development. with current centralization system, it will take a lot of time and not be transparent

[Wind_FURY]

eventually, this should discourage mining and difficulty should adjust downwards as miners shut down. the cost of mining would therefore drop as well. that's why it doesn't make much sense to focus on the current cost of mining: it adjusts upwards and downwards based on speculation and profitability.

Except the price has done nothing but go down during 2018, and the mining difficulty has increased several fold. There seems to be very little correlation between the two, at least this year. If anything its been an inverse correlation.

price is not value, value is not price
if you cut the november 2017 march 2018 mountain away. you will think differently about the chicken and egg game
in november 2017 when prices hit the $5800 flatline.
mining was cheaper.. it has taken many many months for mining to catch up.. until the last couple months the majority of 'cheap mining' is not exceeding the bottomline flatline value of $5800 and so now things have shifted. and value will rise now that people will start to see mining is not profitable compared to last year.

this has taken time due to S9 asics moving from near $3k each to $440 each which has kept mining 'cheap' while hashpower rose. but like i said things platoo'd and now switching

Plus to make some people angry. Bitcoin is not peer to peer. It is a broadcast network. Lightning is peer to peer, it literally sends transactions from one peer to another.

yea i laugh too. i was wondering when he and his friends would jump in to advertise the separate network. kind of a shame that he shamelessly promotes it but yet to understand what he promotes, so i under stand why you laugh at him.
typical PR wannabe. saying bitcoin is not bitcoin but this other network that is not even a blockchain is more bitcoin than bitcoin... (facepalm) im kinda waiting for when the penny drops and he learns what chainhash means in context of a not a pure bitcoin feature. and he learns about the 12 decimal transactions to realise its not bitcoin.. but, i tried hinting
now its left for him to just work it out for himself.

may he soon will learn about routing. may he will learn about needing to be online to receive funds. needing watchtowers and factories. needing middle men services to serve cell apps. but im guessing like his friends they will just spend 2 years in cabin fever and just talk amungst themselves to just self promote the little PR stuff they have

Hahaha. I knew this would push some buttons. But if I was Bob wanting to send Alice some Bitcoins, doesn't Lightning require a user to open a channel to another peer and literally makes users send Bitcoins from one peer to another? Alice to Bob. Peer to peer.

Plus he was laughing because he got it.

[biskitop]

in essence of everything I learned, the creation of bitcoin aims to reduce third-party fraud, or eliminate fraud with the blockchain system and allow peer-to-peer transactions without any third parties.

[fileo]

One thing for sure even Satoshi had good motive creating bitcoin things change. Sometimes people misinterpreted what was the original intention why he created bitcoin. Putting myself in the situation of Nakamoto I would rather be glad to see some good changes due to generation change of tradition and culture.

[DooMAD]

yea which is why many detest how devs have PURPOSEFULLY put a hold on innovating bitcoin for bitcoins sake.

Many idiots, maybe.  Real innovations don't merely involve tinkering with a few static variables and pretending that's somehow going to solve all the problems.  Surely if innovation was on hold, someone would be able to come up with something better?  If you think there's more innovative code out there, would you care to point us to it?  

i know you dislike me highlighting things. but when the developers(people) actually highlight issues themselves.

So which developers have highlighted the issue that they've put a hold on innovation?  Because that sounds like something you're making up.  Stick to highlighting things that are actually true and I won't call you out on them.  It's really not that difficult to understand.  If you don't spread misinformation, I'll have no need to correct it.  And since you failed to answer last time, I'll ask again:

If there is more innovative code out there, would you care to point us to it?  Clearly there's a gap in the market if BTC's development has stagnated.  Where's all the exciting progress being made right now?  What revolutionary concepts do you have to share with us, franky1?  Nothing?  Thought as much. 

Or are you just trying (and failing) to recruit members for your little hate campaign because you got ridiculed that one time?

Well, if that is a critical issue i advice you to make contact with Core/LightCoin dev's about youre concern. They're testing it atm, this will be the moment for it to how to fix it. We'll be gratefull.

i did..
EG last april i spotted the anyonecanspend issue..
their response.
ridicule me for months..

Bitterness does strange things to people.  Maybe you should see a therapist or something? 

[Herbys]

Bitcoin was created in order to eliminate all the disadvantages associated with the standard payment systems to which we are so used.

Fixed some cons, others will appear.

I think that initially no one planned anything.

Bitcoin was created as a mathematical experiment to show an alternative to standard payments.

And for two years, no one needed Bitcoin until Silk Road appeared.

[iTradeBit]

Good post. But I would like to hear Satoshi himself))))

[figmentofmyass]

there has literally been hundreds of proposals. over many years but they never get passed the cabin of core dev moderators that only want to follow their own roadmap, and not actually be open to diverse community consensus.

open source development is merit-based. it's not a charity or a lottery---no one cares if "hundreds of proposals" exist if they're not worthy of coding, testing and merging. core is like any other FOSS project. if a proposal can't reach rough consensus among core developers, why the hell would core implement it?

you should go code your own implementation or submit proposals for an alternative implementation like btcd, knots, bcoin, libbitcoin, bitcore, etc. what you're talking about is a big part of the reason alternative implementations exist at all.

the truth is, your feelings aren't shared by the market. since bitcoin is an opt-in, voluntary network, it's up to the actual users to reject core and pursue an alternative. if bitcoin users were opposed to core's development process, they'd run alternative/incompatible versions. a few actually do that, but the vast majority of node operators don't. your issue is with them, not core developers.