Pages:
Author

Topic: $5000 per coin will never happen if PoW mining is allowed to continue - page 11. (Read 10118 times)

legendary
Activity: 1441
Merit: 1000
Live and enjoy experiments

Again, you are confused if you think PoW distribution is fair, and PoS must be unfair. I admit PoW distribution is "easy", but it might not be fair. PoS distribution requires more thought and design, but a properly designed distribution can be made more "fair" than a PoW distribution.
Please show me a PoS distribution model that you consider more "fair" than Bitcoin/Litecoin/Dogecoin...
legendary
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1003
I think you are confused, PoS is just another way to secure the network, there's basically no difference from how PoW secure the network, except PoS uses stake instead of ASIC, and stake doesn't expend resources, that's all.

Thinking the bigger picture, making network secure is just a technical annoyance we need to deal with.  The perceived fairness of money creation & distribution is many times more important.  

Similarly, nowadays even though rich people can invest in gold mines to acquire more gold, mining gold is still considered much more honest than printing paper dollars by most people.

Again, you are confused if you think PoW distribution is fair, and PoS must be unfair. I admit PoW distribution is "easy", but it might not be fair. PoS distribution requires more thought and design, but a properly designed distribution can be made more "fair" than a PoW distribution.
legendary
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1003
pools/miners/asic hardware vendor are not outside the bitcoin ecosystem in my eyes, they are part of it.

on point, with out any of the pools/miners/ hardware ext there will not be any bit coins!

Incorrect, PoS system are perfectly functional in securing the network, processing transactions and producing currency supply, there is nothing PoW can do that PoS can't do better.
legendary
Activity: 1441
Merit: 1000
Live and enjoy experiments
I think you are confused, PoS is just another way to secure the network, there's basically no difference from how PoW secure the network, except PoS uses stake instead of ASIC, and stake doesn't expend resources, that's all.

Thinking the bigger picture, making network secure is just a technical annoyance we need to deal with.  The perceived fairness of money creation & distribution is many times more important.  

Similarly, nowadays even though rich people can invest in gold mines to acquire more gold, mining gold is still considered much more honest than printing paper dollars by most people. And by centralization the Fed can make their digital dollar network fairly secure with much lower cost than PoS.
legendary
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1003
It sounds like you are just saying that the $500 million figure is roughly the current value of coins mined in one year and that miners will spend an amount slightly less then that on mining. However, there is no explanation on why you keep saying this money is "leaving the Bitcoin eco-system". Are you trying to say that if Bitcoin used POS, then this $500 million would instead be used to purchase coins?

Just tell me, if not the Bitcoin eco-system, who is paying for miner profit, pool fee, asic hardware cost/profit, electricity? are these money not leaving the eco-system? I'm pretty sure they are sitting in the bank accounts of the above, and not benefiting the eco-system.

and Yes, I am saying these money that are used to pay the above, will be instead used for the benefit of the Bitcoin eco-system.
legendary
Activity: 1778
Merit: 1042
#Free market
#kokojie
So did you think the PoW system ( at the moment) is an error ? Which is the better algorithm for you ?

It is not an error, but just a system that is behind the times. Would you be still using VHS tapes, when netflix streaming is available?

If Bitcoin switch to PoS system, all its rules and function will still be the same, just that it will no longer expend $500 million USD in value every year, to pay miners/pools/hardware vendors/electricity companies. All that money will stay in the Bitcoin eco-system, for the benefit of the eco-system.

Your thinking is correct , but if the bitcoin will lose the PoW part I think it will lose all  its (actual) "price" and ( I don't hope this) its value il drop to $ 100/150.

This will be an hard fork and I think not all the users/miners will accept this fork.
hero member
Activity: 728
Merit: 500
pools/miners/asic hardware vendor are not outside the bitcoin ecosystem in my eyes, they are part of it.

on point, with out any of the pools/miners/ hardware ext there will not be any bit coins!
sr. member
Activity: 470
Merit: 250
It sounds like you are just saying that the $500 million figure is roughly the current value of coins mined in one year and that miners will spend an amount slightly less then that on mining. However, there is no explanation on why you keep saying this money is "leaving the Bitcoin eco-system". Are you trying to say that if Bitcoin used POS, then this $500 million would instead be used to purchase coins?

Edit: It may help if you define the "Bitcoin eco-system".
legendary
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1003
#kokojie
So did you think the PoW system ( at the moment) is an error ? Which is the better algorithm for you ?

It is not an error, but just a system that is behind the times. Would you be still using VHS tapes, when netflix streaming is available?

If Bitcoin switch to PoS system, all its rules and function will still be the same, just that it will no longer expend $500 million USD in value every year, to pay miners/pools/hardware vendors/electricity companies. All that money will stay in the Bitcoin eco-system, for the benefit of the eco-system.
legendary
Activity: 1778
Merit: 1042
#Free market
#kokojie
So did you think the PoW system ( at the moment) is an error ? Which is the better algorithm for you ?
legendary
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1003

They are an unnecessary and damaging part of the community. They extract value from cryptocurrency eco-systems and transfer them to pools/hardware vendor/electric company.

PoS eco-systems has proven that PoW mining is not needed.
I've been thinking about PoS, just couldn't figure out the difference between PoS and a would-be digital dollar issued by the Fed.

I think you are confused, PoS is just another way to secure the network, there's basically no difference from how PoW secure the network, except PoS uses stake instead of ASIC, and stake doesn't expend resources, that's all.

All other rules of cryptocurrency still applies, Bitcoin's rules will still be exactly the same if switched to a PoS system.
legendary
Activity: 1441
Merit: 1000
Live and enjoy experiments

They are an unnecessary and damaging part of the community. They extract value from cryptocurrency eco-systems and transfer them to pools/hardware vendor/electric company.

PoS eco-systems has proven that PoW mining is not needed.
I've been thinking about PoS, just couldn't figure out the difference between PoS and a would-be digital dollar issued by the Fed.
legendary
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1003
LOL basic economics fail OP.  POW mining is exactly what gives bitcoin its value.  Miners have to expend real resources and fiat (or other value) to buy mining equipment and to run it, which they won't do unless they and other miners value those costs as lower than the amount of bitcoins they mine with them.  POW mining sets a base value for bitcoin.  That money you think "leaves the ecosystem" doesn't leave, it *sets the price*.

Not really true.  The same thing is said of gold miners, in that the "set the price of gold" and that "gold can never fall below the costs of mining it", but time and again this 'rule' is violated.  The OP has it right.

I think he's probably a miner shill, these people don't care about Bitcoin eco-system, they care only about profits. They even dare to claim their useless PoW mining give Bitcoin value.

Saying Bitcoin derive value from useless PoW mining, is an insult to Satoshi Nakamoto, the developers that contributed to Bitcoin, and the Bitcoin community.
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
LOL basic economics fail OP.  POW mining is exactly what gives bitcoin its value.  Miners have to expend real resources and fiat (or other value) to buy mining equipment and to run it, which they won't do unless they and other miners value those costs as lower than the amount of bitcoins they mine with them.  POW mining sets a base value for bitcoin.  That money you think "leaves the ecosystem" doesn't leave, it *sets the price*.

Not really true.  The same thing is said of gold miners, in that they "set the price of gold" and that "gold can never fall below the costs of mining it", but time and again this 'rule' is violated.  The OP has it right.
legendary
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1003
Now a days getting 500 is quite hard then 5000 looks like a dream.

That is because any new money is basically transferred to pay pools/asic hardware/electricity company, barely any is left to benefit the Bitcoin eco-system. If we end PoW mining today, there would be $500 million new money annually available purely for the benefit of Bitcoin eco-system, how do you think that will affect the price?
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
PoW mining currently transfers $500 million USD worth of wealth out of the Bitcoin eco-system, into the pockets of pools/miners/asic hardware vendor/electricity company.

This wealth transfer will go on, perpetually, as long as PoW mining exists. Because, as long as Bitcoin relies on PoW mining to secure the network, the expense will exist, and it can
not be cheap (otherwise attack on the network will be cheap and easy too).

In order for Bitcoin price to rise, there has to be at least more than $500 million of new money to enter the eco-system, every year, just to maintain the current price.

All Bitcoin holders are essentially charged a 10% tax per year, perpetually, by the PoW mining network. How can this be sustainable?

Excellent post and I think you know the answer.  Bitcoin is not "free".  Seigniorage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seigniorage) is, as you say, 10% a year.  So do the math:  in 7 years the stock of money in Bitcoin will be halved, unless, as you say, new money comes in.  But new money is getting harder to find.  I myself--a Bitcoin long who has two Bitcoin exchange accounts, one in the USA, one in the UK--have yet to buy any Bitcoin because the transactions have been canceled (coinbase.com) or slow in arriving.  I may drop out of Bitcoin if I don't get bitcoin soon. And it took me 44 hours to install Armory, my PC wallet, and I am told that is not unusual.  Only 7000 full Bitcoin nodes exist--a tiny number that makes the Bitcoin P2P network very fragile. Further, the chief scientist Gavin A. has stated himself he sees a day when users get charged for using the P2P network, and already as you know there is a minimum recommended transaction fee for every bitcoin send.  Further G.A. has said anonymity may not always be the same as today in future versions of the Bitcoin P2P network, which will make this network less attractive to the principle people who use bitcoin and don't just horde it for speculation, and that would be black marketeers.

In short, Bitcoin is a bit of a Ponzi scheme for black marketeers working in the dark market.  And, as others have pointed out, the transaction fees in established payment schemes that use fiat currencies, like PayPal, like Western Union, and the like, while high, at least have the advantage of being transparent.  In Bitcoin, these fees are hidden.  Bitcoin is not free of transaction costs, is not anonymous, depends on a fragile P2P network, and is hard to convert to and from fiat currencies.
legendary
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1003
pools/miners/asic hardware vendor are not outside the bitcoin ecosystem in my eyes, they are part of it.

They are not, they are part of a SHA512 mining eco-system. For example, were the scrypt miners part of the Litecoin eco-system? or Dogecoin eco-system?

As shown by the scrypt mining scene, the miners only care about profits (or we could call it extracting value out of an eco-system), the most popular pools are the "auto-switch" pools, they will mine ANY coin that is profitable.

Due to the lack of viable SHA512 altcoins (ironically, this is due to PoW mining being so insecure, any SHA512 altcoin is easily attacked by the massive amount of ASIC available), the SHA512 miners mostly mine Bitcoin, but that does NOT make them part of the Bitcoin eco-system. They will switch to ANY profitable SHA512 eco-system, as long as they could extract value out of it. If mining Peercoin was more profitable than Bitcoin today, you can be pretty sure majority of miners will switch to mining peercoin.

Nevertheless, mining community is part of the cryptocurrency community, every dollar they invested in equipment purchasing or electricity power is a dollar invested in cryptocurrency ecosystem. Bitcoin happens to be the biggest part of this ecosystem.

Whether the miners eventually  "cash out" by selling the mined coins is a different issue, because same argument can be made to speculators and hodlers.



They are an unnecessary and damaging part of the community. They extract value from cryptocurrency eco-systems and transfer them to pools/hardware vendor/electric company.

PoS eco-systems has proven that PoW mining is not needed.
member
Activity: 61
Merit: 10
Now a days getting 500 is quite hard then 5000 looks like a dream.
legendary
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1003

Of course not, that is just a transaction in Bitcoin.

PoW mining on the other hand, by nature will transfer value out of an eco-system. They use hash rate to process transactions, and obtain transaction fee (and possibly
new coins), then they sell these back to the eco-system. So basically, the eco-system is paying a fee for them to process transactions, and also possibly create new coins.
Then the miners use these fee to buy hardware, pay electricity bill, pay pool fee etc... These are money permanently transferred out of the eco-system.

What if they sell to the 'new' people (outside the "eco-system" whatever that is)? Or if they sell to existing bitcoinholders who then sell back 'outside'? Why did you assume that entire $500m is paid by eco-system? That would only be true assuming that bitcoin doesn't expand at all.

It's the same whether they sell to new people, or existing Bitcoin holders. Just think about it, if PoW mining expense didn't exist, then the new money would be entirely benefiting the eco-system
, instead of of paying the miners/pools/hardware vendors/electricity company, and barely any left to benefit the eco-system.
legendary
Activity: 1441
Merit: 1000
Live and enjoy experiments
pools/miners/asic hardware vendor are not outside the bitcoin ecosystem in my eyes, they are part of it.

They are not, they are part of a SHA512 mining eco-system. For example, were the scrypt miners part of the Litecoin eco-system? or Dogecoin eco-system?

As shown by the scrypt mining scene, the miners only care about profits (or we could call it extracting value out of an eco-system), the most popular pools are the "auto-switch" pools, they will mine ANY coin that is profitable.

Due to the lack of viable SHA512 altcoins (ironically, this is due to PoW mining being so insecure, any SHA512 altcoin is easily attacked by the massive amount of ASIC available), the SHA512 miners mostly mine Bitcoin, but that does NOT make them part of the Bitcoin eco-system. They will switch to ANY profitable SHA512 eco-system, as long as they could extract value out of it. If mining Peercoin was more profitable than Bitcoin today, you can be pretty sure majority of miners will switch to mining peercoin.

Nevertheless, mining community is part of the cryptocurrency community, every dollar they invested in equipment purchasing or electricity power is a dollar invested in cryptocurrency ecosystem. Bitcoin happens to be the biggest part of this ecosystem.

Whether the miners eventually  "cash out" by selling the mined coins is a different issue, because same argument can be made to speculators and hodlers.

Pages:
Jump to: