21 millions bitcoin in question - page 2.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on December 05, 2016, 07:16:18 PM

There will never be 21m bitcoins in circulation because some have already been burned and permanently lost (losing a hardrive with all those bitcoins had to suck).

It's believed that the great and beloved Satoshi lord of all things Bitcoin premined a million coins. If he's dead those coins could be permanently lost which means there will never be more than somewhere less than 20m Bitcoins. If Satoshi is actually a team at the NSA then they will re-enter circulation when the US Gov decides to crash the price of Bitcoin down to nothing

Should Satoshi be somehow affiliated with the NSA in respect to Bitcoin development and design, Bitcoin should better be considered as doomed already. And his 980,000 bitcoins would be irrelevant since the NSA obviously wouldn't develop a system for public use without leaving a backdoor. In the case of Bitcoin, that would effectively mean that they could easily get access to any wallet which has been created in the past or will be created in the future by quickly computing the private key through that backdoor. The only way to get rid of such a possibility completely is to change the hashing function behind Bitcoin to something not developed by the NSA or similar entities...

But that would mean a hard fork as far as I understand

davis196

hero member

Activity: 3094

Merit: 929

Quote from: fred21 on November 27, 2016, 06:09:28 PM

Hello,

Hard fork will make possible to extend the number of bitcoin in circulation (more than 21 millions).

However, everyone told me that the majority of node runners will not allow this to happen.

My question is why they will not?

Indeed, this will create more revenu for them, as there will be more bitcoin to mine and not only revenu from transaction fees.

what do you think?

Bitcoin miners will start thinking just like central bankers. Grin

The more money central banks print,the more profit for the central bankers.

Sooner or later the system will be blown away. Grin

cpfreeplz

legendary

Activity: 966

Merit: 1042

Quote from: MingLee on December 05, 2016, 08:09:52 PM

Quote from: xuan87 on December 05, 2016, 06:34:07 PM

I think adding the amount of bitcoin will cause so many bad impact, the biggest impact is the price when the amount is added, automatically it will decrease the value, and because bitcoin is decentralized where the price is based on supply and demand, adding an amount going to add the number of supply, so it will makes the price go down, and then it will be a bad scenario for trader, because if the amount added is too much it will need a lot of time for the price to bounce back

Considering that adding Bitcoin breaks one of the fundamental processes and promises that Bitcoin was bringing to the table, I would think that it is beyond bad and such an event would absolutely destroy a lot of the trust anyone and everyone has in bitcoin, and the value would proceed to jump off a bridge because their investments are now easily made worthless.

Can't add any, can't take away any. Just leave it be at 21m.

Exactly. This goes against the entire principles of bitcoin! If for whatever stupid reason this happens I'm going with a different fork. You can't just make more bitcoins, this isn't fiat.

MingLee

hero member

Activity: 490

Merit: 520

Quote from: xuan87 on December 05, 2016, 06:34:07 PM

I think adding the amount of bitcoin will cause so many bad impact, the biggest impact is the price when the amount is added, automatically it will decrease the value, and because bitcoin is decentralized where the price is based on supply and demand, adding an amount going to add the number of supply, so it will makes the price go down, and then it will be a bad scenario for trader, because if the amount added is too much it will need a lot of time for the price to bounce back

Considering that adding Bitcoin breaks one of the fundamental processes and promises that Bitcoin was bringing to the table, I would think that it is beyond bad and such an event would absolutely destroy a lot of the trust anyone and everyone has in bitcoin, and the value would proceed to jump off a bridge because their investments are now easily made worthless.

Can't add any, can't take away any. Just leave it be at 21m.

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

There will never be 21m bitcoins in circulation because some have already been burned and permanently lost (losing a hardrive with all those bitcoins had to suck).

It's believed that the great and beloved Satoshi lord of all things Bitcoin premined a million coins. If he's dead those coins could be permanently lost which means there will never be more than somewhere less than 20m Bitcoins. If Satoshi is actually a team at the NSA then they will re-enter circulation when the US Gov decides to crash the price of Bitcoin down to nothing.

Of course, there will be more lost and burned in the future but it doesn't really matter because Bitcoin is divisible down to 8 decimal places. The total number of currency units available is 21 x 1,000,000 x 100,000,000 which is 2.1 quadrillion. The current U.S. M1 supply is 3340.50 Billion dollars. You could run every country on two earths with 2.1 quadrillion units. No worries.

mrcash02

hero member

Activity: 1190

Merit: 525

CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!

Quote from: xuan87 on December 05, 2016, 06:34:07 PM

I think adding the amount of bitcoin will cause so many bad impact, the biggest impact is the price when the amount is added, automatically it will decrease the value, and because bitcoin is decentralized where the price is based on supply and demand, adding an amount going to add the number of supply, so it will makes the price go down, and then it will be a bad scenario for trader, because if the amount added is too much it will need a lot of time for the price to bounce back

The Bitcoin system was already created thinking about this issue. They set 21 millions max Bitcoins, because it's a good amount to make the currency worth on long term. If everythings goes as planned, Bitcoin will rise even more, and more people will start using it, making the demand be higher or equal the offer. This is a perfect cycle to let the coin pricing a lot!

No chance to add more than 21 millions Bitcoins in the world... And I don't know someone would like this happen.

xuan87

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1001

I think adding the amount of bitcoin will cause so many bad impact, the biggest impact is the price when the amount is added, automatically it will decrease the value, and because bitcoin is decentralized where the price is based on supply and demand, adding an amount going to add the number of supply, so it will makes the price go down, and then it will be a bad scenario for trader, because if the amount added is too much it will need a lot of time for the price to bounce back

larryfromjapan

newbie

Activity: 38

Merit: 0

Trust in bitcoin would immediately collapse along with the price. Because if they change it once, what is to say that they wont do it again. Besides it would serve no useful purpose.

mastica

hero member

Activity: 938

Merit: 500

Changing the supply of bitcoin, will make the early adopters big and small holders to drop their coins, this will make bitcoin crash into something near like 200 dollars if not lowe, the miners at this value wont be able to profit, soo it could kill bitcoin.
Sure some people had been losted on the last years, but those should make the demand and supply work, and people give more value to their coins.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: Kevin77 on November 30, 2016, 03:12:59 PM

Quote from: South Park on November 30, 2016, 12:37:46 PM

This is a very dumb example but lets use it for the sake of simplicity, if there was only one painting of Picasso that painting will be worth X amount of money, if a second copy was found then the two paintings will be worth X/2 and that is the best case scenario, probably will be less than that, so its very easy to see that the bigger the supply of something the lower the value of that object.

Well by that same example we could assume that it might worth a lot more then 2/x , it is still a picasso painting . So if it worths X amount maybe it will be 0.75X amount and the total would be 1.5X instead of just X .
I believe bitcoins worthy might not drop a lot and still have a lot more bitcoins to go around.

Picassos are not your bitcoins

Every picasso painting is unique by definition, while bitcoins are made fungible on purpose. So two bitcoins will always cost 2x1 BTC. On the other hand, two picasso paintings must cost significantly higher that 2x1 Picasso, even if they share the same view (or thanks to that). How come? Because having a picasso painting in your billiard room is cool, but having two somewhat identical picasso paintings would be just awesome

olushakes

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 254

One of those thing that does not make money lose value is artificial scarcity the same question you should ask why governments cannot just print money to meet its need because it does not just work that way. The same with Bitcoin, if the volume is unnecessarily large then I see its value being eroded away easily and the developer would have foresaw this to have recommended a cap of 21million because that would be the best maximum for the coin.

Kevin77

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1057

Quote from: South Park on November 30, 2016, 12:37:46 PM

Quote from: fred21 on November 27, 2016, 06:09:28 PM

Hello,

Hard fork will make possible to extend the number of bitcoin in circulation (more than 21 millions).

However, everyone told me that the majority of node runners will not allow this to happen.

My question is why they will not?

Indeed, this will create more revenu for them, as there will be more bitcoin to mine and not only revenu from transaction fees.

what do you think?

This is a very dumb example but lets use it for the sake of simplicity, if there was only one painting of Picasso that painting will be worth X amount of money, if a second copy was found then the two paintings will be worth X/2 and that is the best case scenario, probably will be less than that, so its very easy to see that the bigger the supply of something the lower the value of that object.

Well by that same example we could assume that it might worth a lot more then 2/x , it is still a picasso painting . So if it worths X amount maybe it will be 0.75X amount and the total would be 1.5X instead of just X .
I believe bitcoins worthy might not drop a lot and still have a lot more bitcoins to go around.

South Park

hero member

Activity: 2884

Merit: 794

I am terrible at Fantasy Football!!!

Quote from: fred21 on November 27, 2016, 06:09:28 PM

Hello,

Hard fork will make possible to extend the number of bitcoin in circulation (more than 21 millions).

However, everyone told me that the majority of node runners will not allow this to happen.

My question is why they will not?

Indeed, this will create more revenu for them, as there will be more bitcoin to mine and not only revenu from transaction fees.

what do you think?

This is a very dumb example but lets use it for the sake of simplicity, if there was only one painting of Picasso that painting will be worth X amount of money, if a second copy was found then the two paintings will be worth X/2 and that is the best case scenario, probably will be less than that, so its very easy to see that the bigger the supply of something the lower the value of that object.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: fred21 on November 27, 2016, 06:09:28 PM

Hello,

Hard fork will make possible to extend the number of bitcoin in circulation (more than 21 millions).

However, everyone told me that the majority of node runners will not allow this to happen.

My question is why they will not?

Indeed, this will create more revenu for them, as there will be more bitcoin to mine and not only revenu from transaction fees.

What makes you think that it will create more revenue for miners? Even if we assume that such change can be forced (while it can't), this will cause many early adopters sell out their stashes. That would send price vertically down and lead to miners profits turning into losses due to their high mining costs at the current difficulty, even if their revenue increases in bitcoins. But losses are losses no matter how you look at them...

As you can see, miners won't be shooting themselves in the foot

salmanahmedone

hero member

Activity: 602

Merit: 500

Quote from: topesis on November 28, 2016, 01:30:24 AM

Any alteration to the 21 million coin will completely destroyed the work of Satoshi, the price and erode the community trust in Bitcoin, it is not compulsory to be involved with Bitcoin, you can use other tokens that are with high inflation, also the miners have been taken care of with the inclusion of transaction fee

Quote from: Kakmakr on November 28, 2016, 12:35:22 AM

I think what he is trying to say is, if there are more Bitcoin to be mined when the Cap is raised, then miners will be able to mine more coins and this would be the incentive to increase it for them. Even if they raised that limit, then the interval will have to be adjusted to, for miners to benefit now.

The problem is, the supply increase will reduce it's value and this will cancel out any benefit that might be gained by more coins that can be mined now. Normal Bitcoin users will suffer the most, because it devalue their money, so they will start dumping their coins, and the price will even go lower.

And also to cover the cost of mining. Why would they do that?
Even if there is a fork, that forked chain would not survive too long.

TomPlatz

newbie

Activity: 37

Merit: 0

Id say that when we get anywhere near 21 million coins that there will be so many transactions and funds from major adoption that nobody will care risking the outcome of increasing the ceiling.

fred21

member

Activity: 154

Merit: 29

Do the people that are running the nodes also mine?

arcanaaerobics

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

The coins number is a weird point.. We already have 16kk in circulation, rest only 5kk to mine.. I don't think it's "fair" however a change in this numbers isn't the answer, maybe bitcoin will give their place to another alt in the future, lets see what the future have for us.

fred21

member

Activity: 154

Merit: 29

Quote from: Denker on November 28, 2016, 10:46:15 AM

There will never be a number of 21 million in existence because hundreds of thousands of coins, if not millions got lost.Especially in the early days when Bitcoin was worth nothing.
But even that is imo no reason why there should be an increase of the coin amount limit happening.
If we need to do something then add one or two more decimals. But trying to change the limit is ridiculous.Scarcity is one of Bitcoin's most important features.
And if we start to change this once there will be attempts to repeat this again and again and there won't be no difference to fiat and QE anymore.
No no and again no!!!!!

You said no. I am with you.

But who is deciding to make the limit of 21 millions bitcoin go up? this are the node runners, the people who runs the instance of the bitcoin software.

The question is what would make them decide to hard fork and to raise the limit?

Those people are (for the most of them) miners. So they own bitcoins and get revenues from the mining.

It is strange because the people who mine have the power to great more of the thing they are actually mining. This was not the case in the 19th century for gold miners!!!!
-

salmanahmedone

hero member

Activity: 602

Merit: 500

Quote from: topesis on November 28, 2016, 01:30:24 AM

Any alteration to the 21 million coin will completely destroyed the work of Satoshi, the price and erode the community trust in Bitcoin, it is not compulsory to be involved with Bitcoin, you can use other tokens that are with high inflation, also the miners have been taken care of with the inclusion of transaction fee

Quote from: Kakmakr on November 28, 2016, 12:35:22 AM

I think what he is trying to say is, if there are more Bitcoin to be mined when the Cap is raised, then miners will be able to mine more coins and this would be the incentive to increase it for them. Even if they raised that limit, then the interval will have to be adjusted to, for miners to benefit now.

The problem is, the supply increase will reduce it's value and this will cancel out any benefit that might be gained by more coins that can be mined now. Normal Bitcoin users will suffer the most, because it devalue their money, so they will start dumping their coins, and the price will even go lower.

I don't think The devs and bitcoin foundation will allow this to happen. If bitcoin is produced without a limit it would cause a massive fall in it's value and eventually the miners will have a hard time trying to recover their investment

Topic: 21 millions bitcoin in question - page 2. (Read 3828 times)