Regarding the high loss rate of Bitcoin, has Satoshi Nakamoto considered?

[Jeralhong]

thank you very much.
A loss rate greater than 5% per year is an assumption, a possible scenario.

It's good that as a newbie you are thinking about these things. As for me, getting struck in the head by lightning the next time it rains is a possible scenario, but I don't base my life on it.

If the loss rate is too high, the person who owns Bitcoin first can take away the labor value of the new person who wants to own Bitcoin only by depositing coins.

I consider the premise false, therefore the conclusion false as well. Although you are partly right that as time goes by Bitcoin is more expensive, therefore it costs people more money than they earn from their labor to buy it.

And subdivide doesn't solve this problem,What it solves is the convenience of currency use. Because no matter how subdivided, new people need to use labor to acquire new bitcoins.

But I, to anyone who is hesitating whether to buy Bitcoin today, I would recommend not to think too much about it. These forums are full of people who could have bought at one point in the past, didn't and then regretted not having done so.

A good strategy is to DCA, with as much weekly or monthly as you can according to your finances. It's better that than waiting without buying and then complaining that it's too expensive and you're working too hard to get it.

thank you very much.
In systems thinking, if I find that a thunderstorm might hit me, I will install a lightning rod.
I don't think it's a problem that Satoshi Nakamoto didn't consider this aspect, it's just that the results would be different.
Bitcoin is gold, not dollars.

[Jeralhong]

A loss rate greater than 5% per year is an assumption, a possible scenario.
If the loss rate is too high, the person who owns Bitcoin first can take away the labor value of the new person who wants to own Bitcoin only by depositing coins.

Hoarding has the same effect, so you don't even have to have 5+% loss rate, the price will rise anyway.
But isn't it the same with gold, stocks and so on? The early birds always have a big advantage.

and newcomers will no longer want to own Bitcoin because their labor is being exploited by others.

Newcomers will want to profit themselves. This is why people are investing, actually. And with companies already acquiring bitcoin as reserve/store of value, I don't see any problem here.
Again, you have this "problem" with anything that's scarce and is being hoarded, no matter the loss rate.


The loss rate can be a problem only for the coins in circulation, used as currency. That's why people came with solutions like using satoshi or even millisat as measure unit.

I get it
I just want to know what Satoshi Nakamoto has to say about this, and it is not a problem in itself, it just determines the positioning of Bitcoin.

[PrivacyG]

I just want to know what Satoshi Nakamoto has to say about this, and it is not a problem in itself, it just determines the positioning of Bitcoin.

It has already been mentioned on the first page of the thread.  I said Satoshi did talk about this but did not have the quote myself.  I will quote the quote.

As Satoshi said:

Lost coins only make everyone else's coins worth slightly more.  Think of it as a donation to everyone.

Satoshi was well aware of the fact that coins will be lost along the way.  He covered pretty much all the other issues through his lines of code and had he considered lost coins would become a problem, he would have taken the right steps to prevent it.

Bitcoin makes you responsible for your own holdings and if you lose them, they are just gone and the circulating supply becomes lower.  There is no way you can do anything about these coins because you would either have to not be decentralized anymore or you would have to impose a 'theft' in the Bitcoin code as in the Z number of coins that have not been moved for X years will be labeled obsolete, will become impossible to move and the max supply will therefore be increased by Z coins.  How do you make this work?  You just ignore the 'issue' because it is not even an issue at all.  As I previously said.  It is a feature.

-
Regards,
PrivacyG

[kryptqnick]

I think a big chunk of coins were already lost, and as the time goes by, I think it's unlikely that the loss rate is going up. On the contrary, it seems logical that it would become smaller, for a number of reasons. One is that in the early days Bitcoin wasn't worth much, so it's natural that tons of BTC could get lost just because their owners didn't care much about securing the coins. Another reason is that lots of BTC was initially mined, so there were lots of coins to go around with, whereas now there are much fewer new coins, so a more acutre understanding that if you lose some, there might never be enough new ones. The third reason is that cryptos are becoming way better known than they used to be, and they're taken more seriously. A lot of attention is dedicated to protecting the coins, so they're less likely to be lost in large quantities nowadays.

[BitcoinMoses]

Please don't worry about it, I know what is happening and what impact can happen if the percentage of loss of Bitcoin increase. I have the solution to it. I cannnot explain it here right now but I will publish it in future.

[Welsh]

Your biggest mistake is that you are making conclusion based an initially wrong assumption which I don't know where it came from. The fact is that the "loss rate" is not only nowhere near 5% annually but also it will keep decreasing significantly as we move forward for two main reasons.
First is the fact that price keeps rising so each individual owns less amount of bitcoin compared to when it was worth a lot less. So if one person loses bitcoin it is a small amount lost.
Another reason is that as bitcoin becomes more valuable, people are more careful about not losing it. So they take more precautions like keeping more backups in multiple places, etc. and that reduces the number of loss cases.

Also, education will play into it. The more time goes on, the more people will become a little more educated about protecting their Bitcoin, and in some cases even considering handing down their Bitcoin, once they've passed. The biggest early contributor was that a lot of users didn't take Bitcoin seriously, I've had my doubts in the past, and its probably my biggest regret, since I would have been in a far better position than I am now if I believed a little more, well it was more that I let others opinions get the better of me, rather than listening to my gut feeling. Anyway, people now know either the potential of Bitcoin or can see for themselves the potential for the price to swing wildly, therefore people will be much more careful handling that money.

When you consider both of those things, people become more educated, therefore more careful, organised, and they know the value. I can see the loss rate being very minimal.