bitcoin for everyone

[justdimin]

~

so, you r the hostile one?
well, when it comes to non-bitcoiners even the worst enemies become friends 

Nobody is hostile here but you.
And there is no us and there is no them here, you're trying to pitch together people on an idea that actually makes you one of them not of us.

Besides that the simple thought of the whole bitcoin community being on board with your idea just because is bitcoin related is hilarious, we have hundreds of opinions here and hundreds of concepts, and each bitcoiners here has a different view of it from anarchist to commies, from the hard right-wing to socialist, and you're proposing an economical idea, of course, people will have different opinion, what did you respect, that suddenly they will open their pockets and start donating right and left?

I think he is just trolling, if you keep on going at him, he will just enjoy it more and more, there is really no reason to bother yourself with a troll when all they want is your attention and you are giving it to him. I would say ignore him, and that way he will be quite pissed about it for sure.

Not saying that it is a wrong thing that he said, bitcoin for everyone is obviously impossible but at least there is the fact that there is a set amount of bitcoin whereas there is no set amount of people in the world, even on a world pandemic we are growing in population and that should tell you what you need to know about the supply scarcity in the world and bitcoin being limited is one of them.

So, there will be less and less bitcoin available per person, not that all of us will have it, it is just a calculation method and that calculation shows bitcoin should worth more and more eventually.

[NeuroticFish]

the point is to make such a cryptocurrency (let's go wild here in si-fi universe) that people would want and can afford. something that will be:
* easy/convenient to use, cheap (low/no fees) and fast (processing time);
* transparent, secure, decentralized;
* capable of self-defence (possess a mechanism against manipulation and abuse of the system) and governed by the users/holders (different level of voting and various electoral, autonomous bodies within the system that counterbalance and equilibrate each other to avoid corruption and abuse of power);
* suppressing/making unnecessary an urge for greed and unreasonable enrichment (fee if you hold more than you need and speculate);
* stimulating trust, help and support for those who are in temporal difficulties (unforeseen circumstances, illness, etc) but not the LAZY one;
* discouraging laziness and make no room for freeloaders;
* ...

You need a smartphone or laptop, you need internet. Poor people may not have that. So it's not as convenient to use as you want to present it.
A crypto that has low/no fee and fast processing will not have miners, because nobody will work for free, nobody would pay for electricity for you and so on. What you ask for is a centralized garbage you'll call cryptocurrency. So it's a no.
As just said, that will be either insecure (no miners) either centralized.
If you want self-defence at these requirements, only the centralized option remains. Until now you have proven that you don't understand crypto. Now you continue by proving you also don't understand economics. You want things you cannot do. There's no way to preserve value for this... proposal on the free market.
Then you want to do something with money.. something that cannot be done with money. It's human nature. How on earth can "discouraging laziness" for everybody if they get for free what they need?! What planet are you from?!

will unlimited supply be a cause of inflation/decrease in value and other issues of current monetary systems?
will reversible transactions complicate the system, make it less secure and stable?

Yes, but else you'll end up without coins because that you'll continuously waste them. But since it'll be a centralized system, maybe you'll handle with reversing transactions for unused money after a while and you won't need unlimited supply after all if you don't want to.
On a proper blockchain reversible transactions are the worse possible idea. But here reversible transactions will be just fine, since the system is centralized and only yours. And it will not be a blockchain either.


You never answered how people will get this "coin" without it being for free, but still not having to buy it or work for it, hence everybody, including me, still assumes you give it for free.
Also, I think that you fail to understand that you are heading towards a wrong direction, one that cannot be implemented and sustained.

[AKalinousky]

You need a smartphone or laptop, you need internet. Poor people may not have that. So it's not as convenient to use as you want to present it.

remember, we derailed to sci-fi here and not so distant future. so technologies will be penetrate into all layer of societies. mobile phones and internet in 20-30 years most likely won't be an issue

A crypto that has low/no fee and fast processing will not have miners, because nobody will work for free, nobody would pay for electricity for you and so on.

what if processing of transactions will be equally distributed between all connected phones/laptops of those who use the coin. 8 billion people minus children under 8 year who do not need access to money and elderly. let's take away 3 billion. 5 billion connected devices.

that will be either insecure (no miners) either centralized.

centralized system inevitably will lead to inequality and corruption. so, it has to be decentralized. history showed that even the brightest and most noble minds tend to corruption as time goes by.

If you want self-defence at these requirements, only the centralized option remains.

so what self-defence system need in order to be immunable to corruption and abuse of power, but stayed decentralized?

Until now you have proven that you don't understand crypto.

my bad 

There's no way to preserve value for this... proposal on the free market.

limited supply, convenient and easy to use, trustful and transparent. if not. what it needs to preserve value?

Then you want to do something with money. something that cannot be done with money. It's human nature. How on earth can "discouraging laziness" for everybody if they get for free what they need?!

let's fantasise) why lazy the lazy one. because they can be lazy and stay alive. if you do not have income to buy food you have to move your ass in order to put food in your mouse otherwise you starve to death. of course, it a bit extreme, but i hope you get the point.  (we talking about just pure lazy one, who can and able to generate some income)

What planet are you from?!

it was Earth when i last check)

On a proper blockchain reversible transactions are the worst possible idea. But here reversible transactions will be just fine, since the system is centralized and only yours. And it will not be a blockchain either.

so, it has to be irreversible

You never answered how people will get this "coin" without it being for free, but still not having to buy it or work for it.

it can be slowly spreading out among population. the way to do it? if it will be on the sale basis, who get the money? - it means another gready project to get rich quickly. if you have to work for it, it means only limited number of people get it.  if it go just for free people won't value it. so it has to be some honest way so it will be equally distributed and won't be a source of enrichment of a few but a benefit for all.

[Ucy]

true) but to get there we need a bridge. we can't just wake up one day with robots around us, unlimited energy, food suplies and living space. crypto can be the bridge.
and why you keep saying "free bitcoins" ?)  i intentinally wrote few times that i'm not talking about free money. free money leads to greed and lazines. two of the worst burden of human nature. by distribution i mean the widening circle of bitcoin users to the whole Earth population, but defenetly not on the base of foreceble expropriation and equal redistribution. this is way to nowhere.
it has to be some other way: just, transparent, beneficial for everybody, stimulating trust and honesty, fighting greed, corruption and laziness.

If you don't give them for free, it means that they have to either buy them, which is already possible almost everywhere over the world, or work for them, which need some skills and luck, but it's possible too. So I fail to understand what you mean. If you don't give for free, there's no way you can give to everybody, they won't afford it or don't want it.

The bridge you want is, on some extent, made by social-oriented political parties, which in theory give out some minimal money to the poor (and in reality, in most cases, encourage laziness and basically buy votes with public money), in many cases sacrificing a proper development of the country (at least that's what has happened in recent history of my country).

I've noticed that wherever political parties are involved, greed, corruption and laziness are present. We need something worldwide and new (none of the current or past political regimes). But that's "science fiction" again.

But the bridge you want is not necessarily related to bitcoin. Plus that I would give money to people in a currency that doesn't have limited supply and irreversible transactions, since there's always the chance people won't withdraw that money.

I think the important thing is to make sure that people who are capable of working are contributing to society. You could give them free tokens to buy the basic good things they need they can't afford due to lack of money. I'm not sure it's a good idea to give them money to spend most of them on things they don't need. I would probably give them tokens they can only spend on the basic things that's needed for their survival, under the conditions that they will be developing their talents by learning their desired skills from  established businesses through apprenticeship.  By the way, the established businesses would also be supported (if they are good at what they do) by the right government under the conditions they absorb the apprentices.

An apprentice could easily use his token to buy the basic things he/she needs esp from the businesses the government is supporting. The token can be converted by the businesses to the main society's currency.
I think this would be sustainable and would guarantee the needy their basic income.

[NeuroticFish]

what if processing of transactions will be equally distributed between all connected phones/laptops of those who use the coin. 8 billion people minus children under 8 year who do not need access to money and elderly. let's take away 3 billion. 5 billion connected devices.

Will you force them do this?
And if not, then how you incentivize the miners and how will you stop a malicious attacker build/incentivize bigger power and attack your chain?

centralized system inevitably will lead to inequality and corruption. so, it has to be decentralized. history showed that even the brightest and most noble minds tend to corruption as time goes by.

True, but your settings/restrictions made this the only remaining viable option.

so what self-defence system need in order to be immunable to corruption and abuse of power, but stayed decentralized?

One where miners are paid for their effort. This leading to tx fees, and possibly the lack of options related the waste of unused coins.

limited supply, convenient and easy to use, trustful and transparent. if not. what it needs to preserve value?

Limited supply is not enough. You also need demand for it. Just look around there are plenty of crypto coins with under 1 cent pricing and no real chance to get to higher valuation.

let's fantasise) why lazy the lazy one. because they can be lazy and stay alive. if you do not have income to buy food you have to move your ass in order to put food in your mouse otherwise you starve to death. of course, it a bit extreme, but i hope you get the point.  (we talking about just pure lazy one, who can and able to generate some income)

Sure, but you're just provide the income that allows them stay lazy, don't you?

so, it has to be irreversible

And then you'll need a way to handle the money not redeemed.

it can be slowly spreading out among population. the way to do it? if it will be on the sale basis, who get the money? - it means another gready project to get rich quickly. if you have to work for it, it means only limited number of people get it.  if it go just for free people won't value it. so it has to be some honest way so it will be equally distributed and won't be a source of enrichment of a few but a benefit for all.

So you don't know how  Me neither and I don't see how this could be achieved. I mean that I think that it cannot be achieved.

[Mauser]

A different idea could be to make a compelete new coin and everybody gets one. The number of coins is fixed with exactly the number of people on the earth when it is created. For showing your passport everybody can claim exactly 1 coin. So every coin would be given away for free and then they can be traded on the the big exchanges. It is hard to imagine what would happen, but I would expect that many people would instantly sell their coin for some free money. So the initial price would be very low. But once the initial coins are sold I would expect the price to rise.

[pinggoki]

Bitcoin is really for everyone in which means that even the poorest can have a single amount of bitcoin in which they can buy over the wallets or exchangers and etc. This means that bitcoin is really for everyone and not only for rich people. Bitcoin stands for the people so they can acquire it anytime and anywhere in which it is very accessible.

[Betwrong]

~
smells a bit like censorship) what about freedom of speech? setting conversation boundaries no way to a healthy talk.
and to declare "most bitcoiners are middle class" is a bit risky. it's emply either lack of information or over-awareness.
but i understand your poit as of others.
nevertheless we need to look in the future and dream about and immagine even the most impossible things(as Jules Verne onece did). only this way we can make Earth a better place

Trying to make Earth a better place is a good idea, but before starting a new attempt, we should learn history to know what happened with the previous ones. It was never a good idea to simply gather all the wealth around and redistribute it equally among people. It has always lead to many disasters, economical one being among them.

[wahyu wida]

~
smells a bit like censorship) what about freedom of speech? setting conversation boundaries no way to a healthy talk.
and to declare "most bitcoiners are middle class" is a bit risky. it's emply either lack of information or over-awareness.
but i understand your poit as of others.
nevertheless we need to look in the future and dream about and immagine even the most impossible things(as Jules Verne onece did). only this way we can make Earth a better place

Trying to make Earth a better place is a good idea, but before starting a new attempt, we should learn history to know what happened with the previous ones. It was never a good idea to simply gather all the wealth around and redistribute it equally among people. It has always lead to many disasters, economical one being among them.

when we talk about the earth to be better, then what we have in mind is the law of cause and effect. that way we will calculate the consequences of something happening whether it is more profitable or not. of course for now the end point of all these activities is the impact on the economy

[uneng]

year 2050:

some if's and assumptions:
 *99.9% of population has access to electricity and internet;
 * robots almost ready to do all the dirtiest and manual work for humans;
 *humans do mostly intellectual work, craft, art, etc.; they still can do manual and dirty work though, but only if they want to;
 *energy is clean, unlimited and practically free;

Who would need bitcoin or any other kind of money in a world like this? It looks like people would have everything they need to live confortably, without even being necessary to work in order to survive and thrive. Since most human's necessities would be supplied freely, financial trades become near to useless. If it really happens someday the last of your worries will be bitcoin and this extreme equality mania.

[jaberwock]

all we need is a mechanism of equal distribution/

Bitcoin is money. Money is something you receive for goods or services. Why would one give for free the hard-earned money? Just because that money is called Bitcoin?!

Valid point and especially now since it is being accepted and traded among various exchanges, it doesn't make sense to distribute free coins. It might have been a great idea to distribute equal coins when the value of Bitcoins was almost non-existent and from then on we could have repped profits based on how long we can hold.

But all these things are imaginary and we had faucets back in the day if anyone wanted free coins, it is just because Bitcoin is so highly valued now that everyone wants it now.

People often think of Bitcoins as a charity thing but actually, it is more an asset than a currency or charity thing. You just need to buy an asset and hold it for the right time to sell. No one is going to give you free money.

[skarais]

Bitcoin is really for everyone in which means that even the poorest can have a single amount of bitcoin in which they can buy over the wallets or exchangers and etc. This means that bitcoin is really for everyone and not only for rich people. Bitcoin stands for the people so they can acquire it anytime and anywhere in which it is very accessible.

Bitcoin is an asset that actually function both as a mean of payment (currency) and also as a tradable asset. Bitcoin is for everyone, but not for those who have never believed in bitcoin. You may have heard that there are still many people who would not consider bitcoin a profitable asset as both a currency and an investment asset. Decentralization on bitcoin has given us financial freedom and has made many world government fear the fall of fiat. Bitcoin for me, for you and for those who believe in it.

[AKalinousky]

Will you force them do this?

it's well known that whatever you do with force you got a double negative effect. so forcing is definitely is not an option.

how you incentivize the miners

what if every user of the coin become a miner, but a miner who not trying to generating a new block and get a reward, but to process the transactions? since there will be no mining rewards there will not be miners just to mine for rewards. all they need to stay online, so their device processes the transactions. since there will be a large number of users there will be a lot of device to process transactions. calculating power will be equally dividend between the connected devices. to add economic stimulus, connected devices can get a reward for staying online and processing transactions. it not necessary to be coins. it can be reputation, trust score, or any other thing that demonstrate your contribution to the network.

how will you stop a malicious attacker build/incentivize bigger power and attack your chain?

have no answer to that. that why i asked what kind of self-defence mechanism can be implemented to the system to be immunable to abuse of power and all other type of attacks. may be making the system not attractable for such type of attacks can solve the problem. parallel systems, attack at the main net trigger the backup or something like this (just fantasising)

So you don't know how  Me neither and I don't see how this could be achieved. I mean that I think that it cannot be achieved.

of course, i don't know) this is what discussion on the forum is about, isn't it? talking, sharing ideas, inventing new one.
let's fantasise. what if the initial spread of the coin to be in some kind of reward for some good things person do, not necessary for the network itself. just in general: it can be reputation, trust score or some like this. as the coin slowly be spreading out there can be other options to distribute it: some can be giving for free to the poor one (the one that are poor not because of the laziness and bad habits, but because of the harsh of the society: not be able to work, even they want to and can). some can be sold (but the money without any exceptions goes straight for support of the network development, charity, disable people who can't work and other stuff that helps to make Earth a better place.)

Trying to make Earth a better place is a good idea, but before starting a new attempt, we should learn history to know what happened with the previous ones. It was never a good idea to simply gather all the wealth around and redistribute it equally among people. It has always lead to many disasters, economical one being among them.

golden words. humanity shows us that it tends to making the same mistakes. mostly it probably because of our nature. some say that wars, greed and laziness in our dna and the only way to cure it is to eliminate humanity. maybe it is so. but maybe there is some way (like that quote from Avengers about only one out of three billion of possible scenarios in which they won) to cure it without elimination. maybe we just don’t discover it yet. like with black holes. 50 years ago they were a myth. but today it is scientifically proven fact (warning: not preaching, just sharing a thought)

[nakamura12]

The title is misleading which is not everyone can get free bitcoin but there are some who will give free cryptocurrency like vitalik buterin did by donating crypto worth billions for a good cause in india suffering from covid. Not all people use cryptocurrency and let me tell you something that even in the place I live I think that the people know about cryptocurrency are limited.

[Betwrong]

~

Trying to make Earth a better place is a good idea, but before starting a new attempt, we should learn history to know what happened with the previous ones. It was never a good idea to simply gather all the wealth around and redistribute it equally among people. It has always lead to many disasters, economical one being among them.

golden words. humanity shows us that it tends to making the same mistakes. mostly it probably because of our nature. some say that wars, greed and laziness in our dna and the only way to cure it is to eliminate humanity. maybe it is so. but maybe there is some way (like that quote from Avengers about only one out of three billion of possible scenarios in which they won) to cure it without elimination. maybe we just don’t discover it yet. like with black holes. 50 years ago they were a myth. but today it is scientifically proven fact (warning: not preaching, just sharing a thought)

Thanks for the compliment, but if you are saying that we should discover a way of equally distributing all the wealth among all people, no matter what, I disagree. From the economic point of view such a system would be bad for humanity because there would be no incentive to work. As a consequence, the world economy would collapse, and there would be no funds for developing vaccines, for example. So, imo, all people would suffer from such system, the rich and the poor.

[hannahB4]

Bitcoin is for everyone but I won't go with the contextual meaning you sighted equalizing it to the number of people we have in the world. Bitcoin is for all who see it as a means of investment and see a future with holding any amount. Bitcoin is not restricted to age, size, color, race it is for all sundry.

[AKalinousky]

if you are saying that we should discover a way of equally distributing all the wealth among all people, no matter what, I disagree. From the economic point of view such a system would be bad for humanity because there would be no incentive to work.

it definitely should not be "no matter what". history shows that expropriation and equal redistribution is (as i mentioned before) a dead end. good example is soviet union. the evolution of human society chewed it up. as you said there were "no incentive to work", there were no point to do your job better if you get practically the same as your less enthusiastic colleague. the exemptions were "stahanovets" (people who do several day norms of production for one worker in one day). it is interesting that the motivation for this hard work was not of economical nature, but rather ideological. it was the first generation of people of a new country. they saw the life before the equality, the era of unjust capitalism of russian empire. but second generation didn't value it as much as they do not have anything to compare to. finally, the third generation was the one to collapse it and goes back to capitalism (we are not talking here about multitude of various factors that leads to collapse of ussr, but more in general, from people's point of view).

the world economy would collapse, and there would be no funds for developing vaccines, for example. So, imo, all people would suffer from such system, the rich and the poor.

"equally distributing all the wealth among all people" (as it was kind of stated in the original post) is not the goal itself and it  never was. moreover it is not immutable presupposition. it is kind of one of the ways/mechanism (most likely utopian) to achieve harmony in society. so, let's reverse the logic: it is desired to have harmony in the society. how we can achieve it?
* definitely not through the unjust distribution of the resources through the capitalistic mechanism that leads to segregation and a widening abyss between rich and poor;
* definitely not through the unjust expropriation of wealth and equal redistribution;
so (being realistic) it has to be something in the middle, something that make the middle class dominating in the society. if the middle class makes even 80 percent of the whole world population it can be said there is peace and harmony on Earth. it is inevitable to have poor and rich (as we discussed in this topic before: most lazy people stay lazy and therefore poor no matter what motivation society would provide to them to be valued member of the society; same with rich: some people just have it in their blood. they just can't stay still. they are like bicycles, if they stop, they fall). but as long as 80 % (presumably) of world population  more or less equally possessed 80% of wealth and resources (middle class society), the world should be ok.

kind of making accessible and possible for those who want to be part of the middle class society but can't due to various reasons get there (unequal access to education, job market, resources, medical care, governing bodies) have a chance.

[awik p]

Bitcoin is for everyone but I won't go with the contextual meaning you sighted equalizing it to the number of people we have in the world. Bitcoin is for all who see it as a means of investment and see a future with holding any amount. Bitcoin is not restricted to age, size, color, race it is for all sundry.

right, bitcoin does not look at everyone who will use it, but around the world, bitcoin users are only a small part, maybe this is because until now bitcoin is practically only an investment tool. and bitcoin investors in this world are still limited in number. but over time the fame of bitcoin will grow

[Ucy]

A different idea could be to make a compelete new coin and everybody gets one. The number of coins is fixed with exactly the number of people on the earth when it is created. For showing your passport everybody can claim exactly 1 coin. So every coin would be given away for free and then they can be traded on the the big exchanges. It is hard to imagine what would happen, but I would expect that many people would instantly sell their coin for some free money. So the initial price would be very low. But once the initial coins are sold I would expect the price to rise.

For people to keep coming back for more i think such coin would need to be purpose driven, solve real problems uniquely, have dedicated/principled team, stick to true crypto ideals,  has to be be really useful , easy-to-use and safe.... And the value/price has to be dependent on solving this^ problems without compromising on safety.. . otherwise anyone can easily create his/her own coins, pump the price to decieve people.

[dimox]

if that value mean rich, so, no poor people in the world. the problem if how to make money if we have same amount, who will produce, sell a thing if we are equal? world need balance, for rich and poor. if both need money, just make a big work. money just for worker, not for everyone.