Pages:
Author

Topic: A flaw in bitcoin, if it became widely adopted 21m bitcoins, 7b people on planet - page 2. (Read 3263 times)

legendary
Activity: 1848
Merit: 1009
Next-Gen Trade Racing Metaverse
Well currently, money/currency is not evenly distributed at all. If we were to evenly distribute 21m bitcoins to 7b people it would around 0.003 each, but thats never going to happen because no one has the same amount of currency.


But it will be looooongggg before we reach 21m bitcoins.

By the time of all the bitcoins are mined, there will be loss of many coins. We shall have around $16 million in 2140.

We won't even be around when that happens.

@ontopic, it's not much of our concern really. The BTC economy would fix itself, and adjust accordingly. It's supply and demand.
legendary
Activity: 2828
Merit: 2472
https://JetCash.com
Maybe they will introduce Bytecoin to cope with 8 times the volume. Smiley
legendary
Activity: 966
Merit: 1006
Well currently, money/currency is not evenly distributed at all. If we were to evenly distribute 21m bitcoins to 7b people it would around 0.003 each, but thats never going to happen because no one has the same amount of currency.


But it will be looooongggg before we reach 21m bitcoins.

By the time of all the bitcoins are mined, there will be loss of many coins. We shall have around $16 million in 2140.
legendary
Activity: 3990
Merit: 1385
If it later feels like its too less.. its no problem at all to split satoshis into 0.1 and 0.01 more..

This would require a hard fork. Also if 1 satoshi would be worth something significant we might also consider changing mining schedule to go beyond 2140 - that is make the block reward keep halving into fractional satoshis. This would effect how the last few satoshis are mined, but would have no significant impact on the ~21 million total BTC.

Are you sure it would need a fork? I would think that all it would need would be that everyone update his Bitcoin client.

Smiley
I'm not a technical person. However, if the denominations start to go below satoshi, the new client would implement this and if miners mine the blocks with transactions below satoshi, it would create a fork. The newer clients will agree and the older client would disagree. This would create a fork.
The only real problem is that with miner fees.
If we have mass adoption, rise in price, what will happen to the fees and output priority?
The relay fees would probably decrease. The transaction fee the miners want to accept is totally up to them. I would imagine that the transaction priority relaying limit would decrease and the block size would increase in the near future. The blocks can then have more free transactions.

Changes in the client would be small.

The miners would be the first ones to upgrade their clients, because they are on the cutting edge, so to speak.

People who didn't upgrade simply wouldn't have their wallets updated when they received transactions smaller than their clients could handle... at least until the combined amounts for any single address reached 1 satoshi or more. And they wouldn't be able to send smaller amounts than 1 satoshi.

The latest Bitcoin core clients look for the best chain. They would still do this, even if they couldn't update the blocks with fractions of a satoshi. Why? Because the miners would still be using updated clients that would be indicating the best chain.

I, like you, can see that there might be problems. They should be able to be solved. If in the future, when miners were down to mining only 2 or 3 bitcoins per block, or if the whole block size process is going to be changed like Gavin wants, by then everyone will be using an updated client. Are there people who still use version 0.2.0 (we are a 0.11.2 right now)?

Smiley
newbie
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
Well currently, money/currency is not evenly distributed at all. If we were to evenly distribute 21m bitcoins to 7b people it would around 0.003 each, but thats never going to happen because no one has the same amount of currency.


But it will be looooongggg before we reach 21m bitcoins.
legendary
Activity: 3038
Merit: 4418
Crypto Swap Exchange
If it later feels like its too less.. its no problem at all to split satoshis into 0.1 and 0.01 more..

This would require a hard fork. Also if 1 satoshi would be worth something significant we might also consider changing mining schedule to go beyond 2140 - that is make the block reward keep halving into fractional satoshis. This would effect how the last few satoshis are mined, but would have no significant impact on the ~21 million total BTC.

Are you sure it would need a fork? I would think that all it would need would be that everyone update his Bitcoin client.

Smiley
I'm not a technical person. However, if the denominations start to go below satoshi, the new client would implement this and if miners mine the blocks with transactions below satoshi, it would create a fork. The newer clients will agree and the older client would disagree. This would create a fork.
The only real problem is that with miner fees.
If we have mass adoption, rise in price, what will happen to the fees and output priority?
The relay fees would probably decrease. The transaction fee the miners want to accept is totally up to them. I would imagine that the transaction priority relaying limit would decrease and the block size would increase in the near future. The blocks can then have more free transactions.
legendary
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1000
English <-> Portuguese translations
The only real problem is that with miner fees.
If we have mass adoption, rise in price, what will happen to the fees and output priority?
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1008
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

21 million bitcoins. Would mean that if it became widespread no one human could ever have a 'full' coin but it could be spent in smaller denominations.
Jacob

That's the whole point of why it might be very smart to buy one now while a whole BTC is attainable.  The fixed supply is part of what makes it an attractive investment.
legendary
Activity: 3990
Merit: 1385
If it later feels like its too less.. its no problem at all to split satoshis into 0.1 and 0.01 more..

This would require a hard fork. Also if 1 satoshi would be worth something significant we might also consider changing mining schedule to go beyond 2140 - that is make the block reward keep halving into fractional satoshis. This would effect how the last few satoshis are mined, but would have no significant impact on the ~21 million total BTC.

Are you sure it would need a fork? I would think that all it would need would be that everyone update his Bitcoin client.

Smiley
legendary
Activity: 3990
Merit: 1385
There are only 170,000 tonnes of gold in the world. Is that a fatal flaw in gold since it is not possible to own 1 tonne per person?

Scarcity exists. It will always exist. Picking any unit and saying "There aren't enough of these for everyone to have one" is arbitrary.

Bitcoin is fungible to eight places and even after that can be patched to support more.

What is the difference between everyone having 1 bitcoin and everyone having .003 bitcoin? Nothing.

but there approximately 6B(35285 in one ton, x170k) of ounce, which about the same as the numbers of people in the world minus 1B

you need to compare gram to satoshi and you are on the same boat, but with a much lower number for gold

Except that gold is measured in troy ounces. This makes one tonne to have about 32,151 troy ounces. This gives everyone in the world less than ¾ of a troy ounce of gold. This equals almost 1.1 standard avoirdupois ounces of gold per person in the world on average.

Smiley
donator
Activity: 1617
Merit: 1012
If it later feels like its too less.. its no problem at all to split satoshis into 0.1 and 0.01 more..

This would require a hard fork. Also if 1 satoshi would be worth something significant we might also consider changing mining schedule to go beyond 2140 - that is make the block reward keep halving into fractional satoshis. This would effect how the last few satoshis are mined, but would have no significant impact on the ~21 million total BTC.
full member
Activity: 159
Merit: 100
I see no problem. All I see is cute satoshies which worth much more than $
legendary
Activity: 966
Merit: 1006
If all the people want to own some bitcoin, then 21M/7B = 0.003 bitcoin. If the bitcoin is distributed evenly, every body will get 0.003 bitcoin. If you have 3 bitcoin, you are 1000 times richer than average person.
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 502
Circa 2010
i was just arguing that gold is not rare, and the "rare" factor does not matter at all, when you want to talk about adoption and about divisible numbers

bitcoin is not rare also, it's all about divisibility, if you take into account 1 satoshi as the main divisors, there are plenty for eveyrone, bears in mind that i'm not against what he have said, just pointing out a thing

Rarity plays a value in things that are hard to divide as well as the perception of value itself (humans will tend to overvalue things that are 'rarer'). But yes, for all intents and purposes Bitcoin doesn't suffer from this issue due to the ease by which it can be divided. If you were to use an analogy Bitcoin would be like oil (easily dividable) whereas a rare commodity would be like a rare painting - indivisible without losing value.
legendary
Activity: 3248
Merit: 1070
There are only 170,000 tonnes of gold in the world. Is that a fatal flaw in gold since it is not possible to own 1 tonne per person?

Scarcity exists. It will always exist. Picking any unit and saying "There aren't enough of these for everyone to have one" is arbitrary.

Bitcoin is fungible to eight places and even after that can be patched to support more.

What is the difference between everyone having 1 bitcoin and everyone having .003 bitcoin? Nothing.

but there approximately 6B(35285 in one ton, x170k) of ounce, which about the same as the numbers of people in the world minus 1B

you need to compare gram to satoshi and you are on the same boat, but with a much lower number for gold

I don't think you understand - the dollar value or any artificial value is meaningless - all that matters is what can be purchased with it (i.e. real purchasing power). Compare USD and Yen - Yen is roughly a factor of 100 times larger in terms of unitary size, but any meaningful conversion realises that this difference is irrelevant. Given that we can have smaller units than a satoshi if needs be - it matters not what the supply limit is.

i was just arguing that gold is not rare, and the "rare" factor does not matter at all, when you want to talk about adoption and about divisible numbers

bitcoin is not rare also, it's all about divisibility, if you take into account 1 satoshi as the main divisors, there are plenty for eveyrone, bears in mind that i'm not against what he have said, just pointing out a thing
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 502
Circa 2010
There are only 170,000 tonnes of gold in the world. Is that a fatal flaw in gold since it is not possible to own 1 tonne per person?

Scarcity exists. It will always exist. Picking any unit and saying "There aren't enough of these for everyone to have one" is arbitrary.

Bitcoin is fungible to eight places and even after that can be patched to support more.

What is the difference between everyone having 1 bitcoin and everyone having .003 bitcoin? Nothing.

but there approximately 6B(35285 in one ton, x170k) of ounce, which about the same as the numbers of people in the world minus 1B

you need to compare gram to satoshi and you are on the same boat, but with a much lower number for gold

I don't think you understand - the dollar value or any artificial value is meaningless - all that matters is what can be purchased with it (i.e. real purchasing power). Compare USD and Yen - Yen is roughly a factor of 100 times larger in terms of unitary size, but any meaningful conversion realises that this difference is irrelevant. Given that we can have smaller units than a satoshi if needs be - it matters not what the supply limit is.
sr. member
Activity: 574
Merit: 250
In XEM we trust
There are 50 billion dollars being pumped into the system each month. Did you know that there are people in this world who don't even own a single dollar. Also there are people who can't afford a dollar because their are in debt.
hero member
Activity: 798
Merit: 1000
Move On !!!!!!
I wonder what people will call a Satoshi, if the comma needs to be shifted? I am not saying, it will be a immediate need, but we should be debating this, in the event that this needs to be done. Any suggestions ? If Gavin & Mike succeeded in taking control over development, it might have been 1 x Gavi or 1 x Mikey.

Just fooling around, do not get your panties in a bundle. ^hmf^

Haha I will rather stop using Bitcoin altogether than calling units Gavi or Mikey! Cheesy

I think that these are all potential sweet troubles! If we ever come to have worries like this in a community, that will mean that we have made it big time!
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1017
This is not a flame or diss at bitcoin, but it is something I can't get out of my mind. I love bitcoin, and would love to see traditional banks loose their grip. But its one teeny flaw, that I am not sure how it would be addressed short of a hard fork.

7 + billion people on the planet, of which most of those handle a currency of some description.

21 million bitcoins. Would mean that if it became widespread no one human could ever have a 'full' coin but it could be spent in smaller denominations.

Discuss. I feel this is an interesting issue I am curious to hear others opinions on.

Quite a blunt topic I know, but I am insanely curious on this one.

Jacob

Well, if we're talking economy of scale, then the topic starts becoming heated instead of interesting because, while there are plenty of satoshi to go around the world, will the blockchain platform be capable of handling (2.1 *10^6)(1.0 * 10^8), or so, transactions at any given moment?  I mean, the more valuable each satoshi becomes, the more relevant it will become in the ledger and the more likely it will become to see a one satoshi transaction.  Hmmmm!  Just a thought?
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
It seems interesting discussions and has explained a lot. I was more curious to the communities view and it seems like there will be more than enough to go around! I went to bed early so only just read all these replies Cheesy

Jacob
Pages:
Jump to: