I can tell you that there is a way to prevent mining from other software but as im not a programmer i ll keep it for myself.
Your entire "system" is based on this. It is like saying I can get to the moon for $20 so we should offer moon vacations. Then you say "but you can't get to the moon for $20". Then I say look respond with facts. "Lets assume I can get to the moon for $20". How about you show how you can:
a) force everyone to mine
b) do so efficiently (what about people lacking GPU or efficient CPU)?
c) ensure nobody mines except w/ the authorized client
how about you start by providing detailed information on how you will accomplish that without a central authority.
Still just for fun ...
1. More power -> If everyone mines (eg 1 million people) its better than right now (eg 10,000 people).
A false assumption. The average CPU is good for maybe 10 MH/s. My farm is 10,000 MH/s. So 1 dedicated miner with a hashing farm can provide more security than a thousand casual users. That also assumes those casual users will be on 24/7/365. If they aren't. Say average node is online 20% of the time it is more like 5,000. So it is entirely possible that 10K entities in a free market can outmine 1 million nodes in a forced crippled network.
2. Not paying attention to the "printing" procedure (eg mining) and paying more attention and giving more energy to make it acceptable and create a nice network of businesses around it and get it adopted even by stay at home moms (just an extreme example).
Why does your mom need to mine. She could make fridge magnets and sell them for Bitcoins. Using something like Bitpay she wouldn't even need to know/care how mining works just that the network is protected by the largest computing system in the history of mankind.
As for someone getting more clients to attack Bitcoin, he would probably need at least an X number of clients that equals the number of Bitcoin users. So i guess a very big number that is probably not possible to reach.
No he wouldn't. The attacker would simply need more hashing power. Remove profit motive and the average defender node likely will be very weak and used on a part time basis. Attacker simply needs more aggregate hashing power.
The "even chances" part is what my idea includes since everyone will be mining with around the same chances to get the reward.
Where do you get the idea that all hardware mines at the same speed?
I said CPU because i thought it is better for the miner to be as powerless as possible.
You are aware CPU are less power efficient than GPU when it comes to SHA-256 hashing right?
So lets say GPU. From your calculations above we got $4.38 million per year to split equally.
At current hashing power. Hopefully w/ 100K users hashing power will be 10x maybe 20x as high. Also if GPU mining is a requirement what happens to non-GPU users? What about users who have a wallet on their android phone, what about users who want to use an ewallet or light wallet?
With a community of 100,000 users this means: $43.8/year for each user which is $3.65/month! Is this a lot???
With 100K users hopefully the network would be many magnitudes larger. Also what happens to users without GPU? They are excluded.
I might not trying to be offensive or disrespectful or anything but i think the biggest problem with Bitcoin is the miners. Again i want to see Bitcoin succeed as i truly like the idea behind it.
You aren't being disrepectful or offensive but the strength of Bitcoin comes from miners. It is the huge cost of that hashing power that provides any value to the coins. Also you scheme isn't well thought out at all.
I would appreciate it if you reply to this post as well but with facts if possible. Not just a "it cant be done".
How about your use some facts in your "proposal" before demanding responses based on facts. In related news I think vacations on the moon are a good idea. Please only respond with facts (and for the sake of discussion you must accept the cost to go to the moon is $20).