majestik12 (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 2
Merit: 0
|
|
April 03, 2012, 05:02:51 AM |
|
I am not a newbie but have watched the rise of bitcoin with intense fascination. I don't believe it is the solution for humanity, however I do believe it has the power to destabilize governments (facilitating untaxable trade).
I have a stupid question. I searched for the answer first and couldn't fine, but who secures the network once miners (people who secure the network) have no incentive to mine (when all bitcoins have been mined)?
Thanks,
Majestik12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are several different types of Bitcoin clients. The most secure are full nodes like Bitcoin Core, which will follow the rules of the network no matter what miners do. Even if every miner decided to create 1000 bitcoins per block, full nodes would stick to the rules and reject those blocks.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
Stephen Gornick
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2506
Merit: 1010
|
|
April 03, 2012, 06:41:34 AM |
|
who secures the network once miners (people who secure the network) have no incentive to mine (when all bitcoins have been mined)?
Transaction fees will need to replace the currency issuance in the block reward. When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from transaction fees. However unlike the block reward, there is no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security, so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of mining being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security. - http://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Myths#After_21_million_coins_are_mined.2C_no_one_will_generate_new_blocks
|
|
|
|
BadBear
v2.0
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1127
|
|
April 03, 2012, 06:42:25 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
CecilNiosaki
|
|
April 03, 2012, 02:36:19 PM |
|
I was also wondering this and was looking forward to the answer. Thank you for sharing
|
|
|
|
majestik12 (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 2
Merit: 0
|
|
April 03, 2012, 06:31:32 PM |
|
When would a transaction fee take place. Is it whenever a bitcoin changes hands?
Are there charts notating daily transaction volume?
Daily coins being mined?
Has anyone extrapolated these numbers to come up with an estimate as to how much a of a fee would be required to keep miners going at current rates?
Thanks,
Majestik12
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deafboy
|
|
April 03, 2012, 08:52:35 PM |
|
You have my sword...
|
|
|
|
cropse
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 9
Merit: 0
|
|
April 03, 2012, 11:40:31 PM |
|
Someone with some real cash(like a bank) can easily kill bitcoin just by achiving 50% of hashrate or destabilize it by joining the biggest pool swealing it to 51%. Currently it wouldn't be so hard to do, it's just under the radar of big realworld intitutions.
|
|
|
|
colinrgodsey
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 39
Merit: 0
|
|
April 04, 2012, 03:04:26 PM |
|
I am not a newbie but have watched the rise of bitcoin with intense fascination. I don't believe it is the solution for humanity, however I do believe it has the power to destabilize governments (facilitating untaxable trade).
I have a stupid question. I searched for the answer first and couldn't fine, but who secures the network once miners (people who secure the network) have no incentive to mine (when all bitcoins have been mined)?
Thanks,
Majestik12
tx fees, a beautiful thing when you're receiving them
|
|
|
|
GTRsdk
Member
Offline
Activity: 87
Merit: 10
COIN SUPPORTER
|
|
April 04, 2012, 03:08:47 PM |
|
IIRC, the coins will all be mined in 2140 or so.
|
|
|
|
Explodicle
|
|
April 04, 2012, 03:51:56 PM |
|
Someone with some real cash(like a bank) can easily kill bitcoin just by achiving 50% of hashrate or destabilize it by joining the biggest pool swealing it to 51%. Currently it wouldn't be so hard to do, it's just under the radar of big realworld intitutions.
It's not so easy. Right now Bitcoin is by far the most powerful computing network on Earth, so it would be extremely expensive to even briefly execute a 51% attack on their own. Joining the biggest pool (deepbit) gives the decision-making power to the pool owner. So joining actually reduces their ability to attack - if the banks coerce the pool owner into attacking, everyone else joins another pool. And we're not under their radar: http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE83108120120402?irpc=932If anything, they'll try to embrace, extend, extinguish. An overt attack would be foolish.
|
|
|
|
|