Bitcoin Forum
September 26, 2017, 06:40:00 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.0.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Will you support Gavin's new block size limit hard fork of 8MB by January 1, 2016 then doubling every 2 years?
1.  yes
2.  no

Pages: « 1 ... 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 [606] 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1981931 times)
devphp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336


View Profile
September 16, 2014, 05:46:32 AM
 #12101

It was open to anyone who actually did the work of mining not to mention the ongoing opportunity to mine.

It's still not fair. And the ongoing opportunity is not fair, you can only get a few millibits and lose money, while early adopters were each getting fat blocks every day.

See, if you go into the unfairness arguement, this all sounds ridiculous. Where do ideas of fairness come from anyway? Are you guys trying to build communism? Well, you have to share your thousands of Bitcoins then with other 7 bln. people. Equally. If you don't stop talking about fairness, this just looks plain stupid.
1506451200
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506451200

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1506451200
Reply with quote  #2

1506451200
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
LiQio
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1149



View Profile
September 16, 2014, 05:47:15 AM
 #12102

Billions of NXT with 70 addresses distributed to a handful of investors in an IPO for a  measly 25 BTC. That's not fair.

Hundred thousands of BTC distributed to a handful of early miners is?

It was open to anyone who actually did the work of mining not to mention the ongoing opportunity to mine.

So are PoS coin IPOs - open to anyone who actually do the work of reading/investigating/investing.
And the later you come the harder/more expensive it gets. Again same for both system, price for later entry generally depending on the success.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
September 16, 2014, 05:52:17 AM
 #12103

It was open to anyone who actually did the work of mining not to mention the ongoing opportunity to mine.

It's still not fair. And the ongoing opportunity is not fair, you can only get a few millibits and lose money, while early adopters were each getting fat blocks every day.

While doing all that work and paying for electricity for BTC at a price of $0.05 and a chance for it to go to 0.

Coins mined today could still be worth lots tomorrow. At least we have a short at mining fresh coins. Not with POS. 
devphp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336


View Profile
September 16, 2014, 05:55:32 AM
 #12104

While doing all that work and paying for electricity for BTC at a price of $0.05 and a chance for it to go to 0.

Coins mined today could still be worth lots tomorrow. At least we have a short at mining fresh coins. Not with POS. 

That's risk taking. Risk taking should be rewarded, nobody argues with that. However, you argue that other people taking risk, outside of Bitcoin system, somehow don't deserve to be rewarded. How is that not hypocritical?
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
September 16, 2014, 05:59:46 AM
 #12105

While doing all that work and paying for electricity for BTC at a price of $0.05 and a chance for it to go to 0.

Coins mined today could still be worth lots tomorrow. At least we have a short at mining fresh coins. Not with POS. 

That's risk taking. Risk taking should be rewarded, nobody argues with that. However, you argue that other people taking risk, outside of Bitcoin system, somehow don't deserve to be rewarded. How is that not hypocritical?

You're inflating the cryptocurrency space with a coin created with code only, no work.
devphp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336


View Profile
September 16, 2014, 06:03:11 AM
 #12106

You're inflating the cryptocurrency space with a coin created with code only, no work.

First of all, I am not inflating anything, I am a user.

Second, if you can skip the work part and achieve the same and even much more, why do you need the work part? Just for the sake of work? Why don't people still do all the manual work at this age but instead use devices to make their life easier? Not to mention, this 'work' you're referring to is not sustainable long term, if it keeps growing at the rate it is growing, soon half the world will be working to produce ASICs and generate electricity for mining Bitcoin. Which is of course crazy and not gonna happen, something's gotta give sooner or later.
LiQio
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1149



View Profile
September 16, 2014, 06:08:57 AM
 #12107


You're inflating the cryptocurrency space with a coin created with code only, no work.

I believe burning electricity and hard work were not Satoshis ideas.
PoW was suggested mainly as a solution to double spending. Now other ("improved") ideas are available.
Work itself doesn't give any value to objects.
Frankly I don't care if a gold nugget was found in my garden or if it had to be dug up from 1000 feet - same value.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
September 16, 2014, 06:10:42 AM
 #12108

You're inflating the cryptocurrency space with a coin created with code only, no work.

First of all, I am not inflating anything, I am a user.

Second, if you can skip the work part and achieve the same and even much more, why do you need the work part? Just for the sake of work? Why don't people still do all the manual work at this age but instead use devices to make their life easier? Not to mention, this 'work' you're referring to is not sustainable long term, if it keeps growing at the rate it is growing, soon half the world will be working to produce ASICs and generate electricity for mining Bitcoin. Which is of course crazy and not gonna happen, something's gotta give sooner or later.

The real world work part and electricity costs are quite important to discourage gvt attacks. They'd just rather print money to try and attack Bitcoin I'd imagine.  Sorta sounds like POS. Attacks have to be expensive.

Stakeholder collusion would be very bad. 
devphp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336


View Profile
September 16, 2014, 06:15:02 AM
 #12109

The real world work part and electricity costs are quite important to discourage gvt attacks.

It's not a sustainable path, it can go on for some time, but not forever. They are not gonna produce ASICs to outrun miners, don't worry. What will happen most likely is the electricity fees will be raised dramatically for Bitcoin mining by governments to drive them out of business. In the interests of security of other electricity users. And that is one of major flaws of Bitcoin, it depends on scarce natural resources, that others are in competition for.
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
September 16, 2014, 06:21:51 AM
 #12110

The real world work part and electricity costs are quite important to discourage gvt attacks.

It's not a sustainable path, it can go on for some time, but not forever. They are not gonna produce ASICs to outrun miners, don't worry. What will happen most likely is the electricity fees will be raised dramatically for Bitcoin mining by governments to drive them out of business. In the interests of security of other electricity users. And that is one of major flaws of Bitcoin, it depends on scarce natural resources, that others are in competition for.
Raising energy prices would hurt everyone. It's all relative.

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
September 16, 2014, 06:23:09 AM
 #12111

The real world work part and electricity costs are quite important to discourage gvt attacks.

It's not a sustainable path, it can go on for some time, but not forever. They are not gonna produce ASICs to outrun miners, don't worry. What will happen most likely is the electricity fees will be raised dramatically for Bitcoin mining by governments to drive them out of business. In the interests of security of other electricity users. And that is one of major flaws of Bitcoin, it depends on scarce natural resources, that others are in competition for.

Not if it replaces significant parts of the banking system.

http://www.coindesk.com/microscope-economic-environmental-costs-bitcoin-mining/
devphp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336


View Profile
September 16, 2014, 06:36:03 AM
 #12112

Raising energy prices would hurt everyone. It's all relative.

Only Bitcoin miners, it would be targeted at them. Governments don't like competition.

Not if it replaces significant parts of the banking system.

Dreams are nice, reality is harsh.
kehtolo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 706


View Profile
September 16, 2014, 06:40:53 AM
 #12113

I would say you would have a pretty good legal leg to stand on if they raised prices only for one particular industry.

In most countries there is a privatised energy industry -meaning it wouldn't be the governments decision to raise or lower prices.

Also - it would be easier to just ban bitcoin mining in a country, declare it illegal. This would be a better route if you wanted to stop or discourage it, as opposed to charging miners higher electricity costs.


The next 24 hours are critical!
devphp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336


View Profile
September 16, 2014, 06:47:54 AM
 #12114

I would say you would have a pretty good legal leg to stand on if they raised prices only for one particular industry.

In most countries there is a privatised energy industry -meaning it wouldn't be the governments decision to raise or lower prices.

Also - it would be easier to just ban bitcoin mining in a country, declare it illegal. This would be a better route if you wanted to stop or discourage it, as opposed to charging miners higher electricity costs.

Legislation is not set in stone, it can be changed in the name of national security, welfare of people, optimized usage of natural resources, etc. you get the idea. Electricity fees are a good attack vector, they are not using it yet, because Bitcoin is still insignificant and doesn't pose a threat yet. When/If it does, all bets are off.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
September 16, 2014, 07:37:55 AM
 #12115

I would say you would have a pretty good legal leg to stand on if they raised prices only for one particular industry.

In most countries there is a privatised energy industry -meaning it wouldn't be the governments decision to raise or lower prices.

Also - it would be easier to just ban bitcoin mining in a country, declare it illegal. This would be a better route if you wanted to stop or discourage it, as opposed to charging miners higher electricity costs.

Legislation is not set in stone, it can be changed in the name of national security, welfare of people, optimized usage of natural resources, etc. you get the idea. Electricity fees are a good attack vector, they are not using it yet, because Bitcoin is still insignificant and doesn't pose a threat yet. When/If it does, all bets are off.

You are so full of FUD.

so which gvt are you talking about? The US? China? Russia? Or all of them together since they all seem to get along so well?
User705
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728



View Profile
September 16, 2014, 07:53:23 AM
 #12116

Not if it replaces significant parts of the banking system.

Dreams are nice, reality is harsh.

All Bitcoin needs to be is a superior alternative. Personally, I think it is. Time will tell.
Currently the banking sector together with central banks control money almost completely.  How would ceding that control to bitcoin be a superior alternative for them?  It may be a superior alternative for everyone else but it certainly isn't for the banking system.
devphp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336


View Profile
September 16, 2014, 08:11:06 AM
 #12117

You are so full of FUD.

I am leaving this thread then. Please stay in your blissful ignorance.
nexern
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 597



View Profile
September 16, 2014, 08:17:26 AM
 #12118

It was open to anyone who actually did the work of mining not to mention the ongoing opportunity to mine.

It's still not fair. And the ongoing opportunity is not fair, you can only get a few millibits and lose money, while early adopters were each getting fat blocks every day.

While doing all that work and paying for electricity for BTC at a price of $0.05 and a chance for it to go to 0.

Coins mined today could still be worth lots tomorrow. At least we have a short at mining fresh coins. Not with POS.  

even if we are talking about a biger timeframe here it seems some of you forgot that as soon the last btc is mined it turns into a kind of a pos system also,
where miners are rewarded just by transaction fees. nxt just jumps directly into this stage.

moreover, you can't be very sure that the btc distribution looks much better than nxt as soon it turns into this level.
just compare the real distribution numbers of both and don't argue that a mass of miners, who getting some pico-btc, are really changing this picture,
it's looking more than an ongoing wealth and mining concentration within btc than a real mass distribution.

it seems dynamic systems always tend to reach pareto, no matter what kind of initial parameters you choose.

added: using this analogy the interesting question is this.
assuming btc reaches this pos like level and also assuming the distribution follows pareto for btc and nxt at this stage.
which one of both will have the better, further mass distribution. btc, with a very high value, concentrated to 100 entities
or nxt with the same entities but much lower value?

as mentioned before, don't be toooo sure...
valarmg
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 237


View Profile
September 16, 2014, 08:58:09 AM
 #12119


While doing all that work and paying for electricity for BTC at a price of $0.05 and a chance for it to go to 0.

Coins mined today could still be worth lots tomorrow. At least we have a short at mining fresh coins. Not with POS. 

For PoW coins, there are two ways to get them.

1) You buy mining equipment, spend time and money mining them.
2) You buy the coins on the market.

For PoS stakes there is one way to get them.
1) You buy coins on the market.

In both cases you spend money to gain coins, and in both cases you can make or lose money if the coin goes up or down. Removing the first part of the equation, being able to mine the coins doesn't have much effect unless you happen to have a factory of mining equipment in your backyard.
klee
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470



View Profile
September 16, 2014, 09:00:48 AM
 #12120

Mining tends to centralisation.

PoS tends to centralisation.

Everything that can be CENTRALISED, will be centralised - the opposite holds true too.

It is a never ending battle - technology is bringing us closer to freedom and enslavement at the same time.

Stop arguing which is more decentralised, fair, anti gvt etc.

The point is our personal stance.

I don't see a problem if 1000 people decide to make exchanges between them based on shit (Proof of Shit), debt, gold or PoW.

Important thing is to decide what kind of power distribution they want.

Technology is a weapon but it can be used by all sides... (just wait to see a gvt based PoW and what ASICS will mine in that case...I would mine them instead of BTC for sure!)

BTC: 1K9atu5zgz7izCMAynk5adBJ8Qn2YgS6nT
Pages: « 1 ... 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 [606] 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 ... 1558 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!