Bitcoin Forum
November 10, 2024, 12:59:22 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 28.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: What if someday Bitcoin Foundation votes to remove 21M limitation?  (Read 6081 times)
designfail (OP)
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 86
Merit: 10


View Profile
June 03, 2014, 10:03:24 PM
 #1

Say, at some point big banks and hedge funds make an agreement with core developers to remove the limitation of 21M and have the foundation vote for this?
Is it possible in theory and on practice?
bananas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364
Merit: 257


View Profile
June 03, 2014, 10:05:14 PM
 #2

yes, 100% possible
bg002h
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1466
Merit: 1048


I outlived my lifetime membership:)


View Profile WWW
June 03, 2014, 10:09:53 PM
 #3

Then the world would laugh and quietly ignore such nonsense.

But worry not, such craziness won't occur. It's not under anyone's control except consensus of the community.

Even if the core devs vote to remove the 21M limit, it still won't make it so.

Hardforks aren't that hard. It’s getting others to use them that's hard.
1GCDzqmX2Cf513E8NeThNHxiYEivU1Chhe
Ron~Popeil
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406
Merit: 250



View Profile
June 03, 2014, 10:11:19 PM
 #4

The community would never allow it. Part of the sheer brilliance of the protocol is that it requires consensus.

acs267
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 03, 2014, 10:15:19 PM
 #5

My fucking god. The Bitcoin Foundation has no power. Realize that.
designfail (OP)
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 86
Merit: 10


View Profile
June 03, 2014, 10:17:54 PM
 #6

Then the world would laugh and quietly ignore such nonsense.

But worry not, such craziness won't occur. It's not under anyone's control except consensus of the community.

Even if the core devs vote to remove the 21M limit, it still won't make it so.

But big investors already articulated their interest: they want BTC to be inflatable. Reasonable, but inflatable. Something like: yes, BTC is great, innovative technology, but in order to make it useful international currency, it needs to be inflatable. Say, 1-5M bitcoins a year. The general population ("the community") will eat this no problem. Early adopters will be pissed off for sure, but they are in minority.
designfail (OP)
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 86
Merit: 10


View Profile
June 03, 2014, 10:19:05 PM
 #7

My fucking god. The Bitcoin Foundation has no power. Realize that.

Let's say that at some point when big players enter the game, the foundation starts gaining the power. How about that?
jbrnt
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 672
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 03, 2014, 10:20:00 PM
 #8

TBF holds a sizable amout of bitcoin. Its board members and corporate members have hugh vested interests in bitcoin. They know that raising the 21M limit will devalue their bitcoin holdings. TBF will not be stupid enough to vote for an increase in bitcoin supply.
sgbett
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2576
Merit: 1087



View Profile
June 03, 2014, 10:20:41 PM
 #9

The migration to [litecoin]* would be immense.


*or some other coin(s)

"A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution" - Satoshi Nakamoto
*my posts are not investment advice*
alani123
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2576
Merit: 1510



View Profile
June 03, 2014, 10:22:43 PM
 #10

The network consists of nodes. If such a change was decided to be implemented, it would require agreement of more than the 51% of those nodes so the network can fork and implement this change as a valid one.

My technical knowledge on bitcoin is not an expert's one since I'm not familiar with programming. But I'm sure that you can see where this is going. In simple words: if a "central authority" decides to to something like that they wouldn't be able to without the networks permission.

The network consists of everyone running a bitcoin node, you and me could be running a node by having a wallet with the full blockchain in it...

███████████████████████████
███████▄████████████▄██████
████████▄████████▄████████
███▀█████▀▄███▄▀█████▀███
█████▀█▀▄██▀▀▀██▄▀█▀█████
███████▄███████████▄███████
███████████████████████████
███████▀███████████▀███████
████▄██▄▀██▄▄▄██▀▄██▄████
████▄████▄▀███▀▄████▄████
██▄███▀▀█▀██████▀█▀███▄███
██▀█▀████████████████▀█▀███
███████████████████████████
 
 Duelbits 
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██

██

██

██

██
TRY OUR UNIQUE GAMES!
    ◥ DICE  ◥ MINES  ◥ PLINKO  ◥ DUEL POKER  ◥ DICE DUELS   
█▀▀











█▄▄
 
███
▀▀▀
███
▀▀▀
███
▀▀▀
███
▀▀▀

███
▀▀▀
███
▀▀▀
 
███
▀▀▀

███
▀▀▀
███
▀▀▀
███
▀▀▀
███
▀▀▀
███
▀▀▀
 
███
▀▀▀
███
▀▀▀
███
▀▀▀
███
▀▀▀

███
▀▀▀
███
▀▀▀
 
███
▀▀▀
███
▀▀▀
███
▀▀▀

███
▀▀▀
███
▀▀▀
███
▀▀▀
 
███
▀▀▀
███
▀▀▀

███
▀▀▀
███
▀▀▀
███
▀▀▀

███
▀▀▀
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
 KENONEW 
 
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
▀▀█











▄▄█
10,000x
 
MULTIPLIER
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██

██

██

██

██
 
NEARLY
UP TO
50%
REWARDS
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██

██

██

██

██
[/tabl
Ron~Popeil
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406
Merit: 250



View Profile
June 03, 2014, 10:23:13 PM
 #11

The migration to [litecoin]* would be immense.


*or some other coin(s)

BTC 2.0. People everywhere would be digging dusty old asics out of their attic for the new gold rush.  

designfail (OP)
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 86
Merit: 10


View Profile
June 03, 2014, 10:24:04 PM
 #12

The community would never allow it. Part of the sheer brilliance of the protocol is that it requires consensus.

The consensus between core devs and big players could be reached. And a new blackchain is introduced to masses, while legacy blockchain is still running until it's extinction. How about that?
acs267
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 03, 2014, 10:24:47 PM
 #13

My fucking god. The Bitcoin Foundation has no power. Realize that.

Let's say that at some point when big players enter the game, the foundation starts gaining the power. How about that?

Do you honestly think they could EVER control Bitcoin? That every Bitcoin user would fall into a synchronized team with them? So many Bitcoiners hate them it's unimaginable. No 'big players' can change that. Unless they 'crash' Bitcoin, which is so unlikely it hurts, they still won't have any power.
sgbett
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2576
Merit: 1087



View Profile
June 03, 2014, 10:28:35 PM
 #14

My fucking god. The Bitcoin Foundation has no power. Realize that.

Let's say that at some point when big players enter the game, the foundation starts gaining the power. How about that?

Do you honestly think they could EVER control Bitcoin? That every Bitcoin user would fall into a synchronized team with them? So many Bitcoiners hate them it's unimaginable. No 'big players' can change that. Unless they 'crash' Bitcoin, which is so unlikely it hurts, they still won't have any power.

"Nice cryptocurreny you have there, be a shame if something happened to it..."

is my first thought on that!  Wink

"A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution" - Satoshi Nakamoto
*my posts are not investment advice*
designfail (OP)
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 86
Merit: 10


View Profile
June 03, 2014, 10:30:09 PM
 #15

My fucking god. The Bitcoin Foundation has no power. Realize that.

Let's say that at some point when big players enter the game, the foundation starts gaining the power. How about that?

Do you honestly think they could EVER control Bitcoin? That every Bitcoin user would fall into a synchronized team with them? So many Bitcoiners hate them it's unimaginable. No 'big players' can change that. Unless they 'crash' Bitcoin, which is so unlikely it hurts, they still won't have any power.

The more I buy & mine, the more thoughts like that are coming to my mind. I doubt that big dogs will let lots of people with their "20..50..100 and up" coins to become rich elite overnight.
Meuh6879
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512
Merit: 1012



View Profile
June 03, 2014, 10:34:16 PM
 #16

Bitcoin is not 21M ... bitcoin is :

21.000.000 , 000 000 000 (bananas)

BitCoinDream
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2394
Merit: 1216

The revolution will be digital


View Profile
June 03, 2014, 10:34:27 PM
 #17

Say, at some point big banks and hedge funds make an agreement with core developers to remove the limitation of 21M and have the foundation vote for this?
Is it possible in theory and on practice?

I think 51% miners need to accept 21M+ coins to have those mined coin's transactions be included in new blocks. If >50% miners agree ...this can happen but that would actually be the fall of their own wealth, coz services running on bitcoin will immediately shift to some alt.

p.s. Bitcoin is not only protected by code, but also by market economics  Wink


Gemminyc
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 158
Merit: 100


View Profile
June 03, 2014, 10:46:24 PM
 #18

Who knows what the poor masses having mBTC ballances decide to vote for in the future. Will be interesting anyway
wachtwoord
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2338
Merit: 1136


View Profile
June 03, 2014, 10:47:59 PM
 #19

Then we laugh  Cheesy
designfail (OP)
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 86
Merit: 10


View Profile
June 03, 2014, 10:49:12 PM
 #20

Say, at some point big banks and hedge funds make an agreement with core developers to remove the limitation of 21M and have the foundation vote for this?
Is it possible in theory and on practice?

I think 51% miners need to accept 21M+ coins to have those mined coin's transactions be included in new blocks. If >50% miners agree ...this can happen but that would actually be the fall of their own wealth, coz services running on bitcoin will immediately shift to some alt.

p.s. Bitcoin is not only protected by code, but also by market economics  Wink



I think big players could easily control 90% or more of all hashing power. Say, a megapool driven by asics on hundreds of acres at Greenland or Alaska.

Disclaimer: I am not going to spread FUD, just want to share some thoughts and find answers
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!