Topic: Adding More Decimal Places To Bitcoin Would Not Be Printing More Money (Read 3053 times)
August 11, 2013, 09:20:37 AM
wtf? this post is making me dizzy
August 11, 2013, 09:08:12 AM
actually I found that image hilarious, CasinoBit : )
August 10, 2013, 10:09:55 PM
By "more" bitcoin units I was not referring to more value, I was referring to more quantity of units available.
But I can now see what you guys are saying-- Proportionately, you would always have the same quantity in comparison to others, even if additional Bitcoin decimal places were added. You'd just be that much better off and would be allowing others to get into the bitcoin game as well.
As a side note in a social study of this thread, it's interesting (and sad) how bitter/savage some people were when "educating" or "correcting". For those who debated in a calm manner, I applaud you. For those that resorted to attacking or insulting, well... that's on you.
But I can now see what you guys are saying-- Proportionately, you would always have the same quantity in comparison to others, even if additional Bitcoin decimal places were added. You'd just be that much better off and would be allowing others to get into the bitcoin game as well.
As a side note in a social study of this thread, it's interesting (and sad) how bitter/savage some people were when "educating" or "correcting". For those who debated in a calm manner, I applaud you. For those that resorted to attacking or insulting, well... that's on you.
I understand OP's point of view, adding smallest unit of count gives a feeling that the total amount of the smallest money unit is increased, but as others pointed out, OP mixed base unit with a fraction of base unit. Anyway, OP's thread is very interesting
If you are designing a currency system to cope with an expanding economy, you have two choices: Either fix the value of base unit and add more and more base unit (today's fiat money system); or fix the total amount of base unit, and add more and more value for each base unit
If people are used to a floated currency value, either way will work, but the beneficiaries of these two systems are different: In the first system it is the new money creator and those who get money from money creator, in the second system it is anyone who save money
Very well said and diplomatic of you. I also think it's interesting to think about and talk about all aspects of Bitcoin.If you are designing a currency system to cope with an expanding economy, you have two choices: Either fix the value of base unit and add more and more base unit (today's fiat money system); or fix the total amount of base unit, and add more and more value for each base unit
If people are used to a floated currency value, either way will work, but the beneficiaries of these two systems are different: In the first system it is the new money creator and those who get money from money creator, in the second system it is anyone who save money
Lol I was just kidding man, stop by the free hugs thread I'll give you one to calm your nerves.
August 09, 2013, 04:17:46 PM
By "more" bitcoin units I was not referring to more value, I was referring to more quantity of units available.
But I can now see what you guys are saying-- Proportionately, you would always have the same quantity in comparison to others, even if additional Bitcoin decimal places were added. You'd just be that much better off and would be allowing others to get into the bitcoin game as well.
As a side note in a social study of this thread, it's interesting (and sad) how bitter/savage some people were when "educating" or "correcting". For those who debated in a calm manner, I applaud you. For those that resorted to attacking or insulting, well... that's on you.
But I can now see what you guys are saying-- Proportionately, you would always have the same quantity in comparison to others, even if additional Bitcoin decimal places were added. You'd just be that much better off and would be allowing others to get into the bitcoin game as well.
As a side note in a social study of this thread, it's interesting (and sad) how bitter/savage some people were when "educating" or "correcting". For those who debated in a calm manner, I applaud you. For those that resorted to attacking or insulting, well... that's on you.
I understand OP's point of view, adding smallest unit of count gives a feeling that the total amount of the smallest money unit is increased, but as others pointed out, OP mixed base unit with a fraction of base unit. Anyway, OP's thread is very interesting
If you are designing a currency system to cope with an expanding economy, you have two choices: Either fix the value of base unit and add more and more base unit (today's fiat money system); or fix the total amount of base unit, and add more and more value for each base unit
If people are used to a floated currency value, either way will work, but the beneficiaries of these two systems are different: In the first system it is the new money creator and those who get money from money creator, in the second system it is anyone who save money
Very well said and diplomatic of you. I also think it's interesting to think about and talk about all aspects of Bitcoin.If you are designing a currency system to cope with an expanding economy, you have two choices: Either fix the value of base unit and add more and more base unit (today's fiat money system); or fix the total amount of base unit, and add more and more value for each base unit
If people are used to a floated currency value, either way will work, but the beneficiaries of these two systems are different: In the first system it is the new money creator and those who get money from money creator, in the second system it is anyone who save money
If you were looking for education, maybe ask a question instead of make a bold (and dumb) proclamation as a thread title.
August 09, 2013, 03:48:51 PM
As a side note in a social study of this thread, it's interesting (and sad) how bitter/savage some people were when "educating" or "correcting". For those who debated in a calm manner, I applaud you. For those that resorted to attacking or insulting, well... that's on you.
don't be sad. some others got it also wrong. you are not alone. e.g. "der_troll" said, that it affects everyone equally. well, that's technically true, but adding more decimal places does NOT affect any existing coins at all. that's the whole point everyone tries to make.
… and finally ,that's the internetz. you need a thick skin here!
August 09, 2013, 03:02:52 PM
I lost a few brain cells just reading OP's title.
August 09, 2013, 02:56:35 PM
TL;DR: OP is wrong because he doesn't understand decimal places. Move along.
+1
I seriously doubt there will ever be a time, no matter how far in the future, when anyone will ever claim that they could not participate in the Bitcoin economy because obtaining satoshis was prohibitively expensive.
August 09, 2013, 02:53:46 PM
People read this kind of drivel and post threads like "Isn't the Bitcoin Community really Smart?" LOL @ them.
August 09, 2013, 02:47:57 PM
By "more" bitcoin units I was not referring to more value, I was referring to more quantity of units available.
But I can now see what you guys are saying-- Proportionately, you would always have the same quantity in comparison to others, even if additional Bitcoin decimal places were added. You'd just be that much better off and would be allowing others to get into the bitcoin game as well.
As a side note in a social study of this thread, it's interesting (and sad) how bitter/savage some people were when "educating" or "correcting". For those who debated in a calm manner, I applaud you. For those that resorted to attacking or insulting, well... that's on you.
But I can now see what you guys are saying-- Proportionately, you would always have the same quantity in comparison to others, even if additional Bitcoin decimal places were added. You'd just be that much better off and would be allowing others to get into the bitcoin game as well.
As a side note in a social study of this thread, it's interesting (and sad) how bitter/savage some people were when "educating" or "correcting". For those who debated in a calm manner, I applaud you. For those that resorted to attacking or insulting, well... that's on you.
I understand OP's point of view, adding smallest unit of count gives a feeling that the total amount of the smallest money unit is increased, but as others pointed out, OP mixed base unit with a fraction of base unit. Anyway, OP's thread is very interesting
If you are designing a currency system to cope with an expanding economy, you have two choices: Either fix the value of base unit and add more and more base unit (today's fiat money system); or fix the total amount of base unit, and add more and more value for each base unit
If people are used to a floated currency value, either way will work, but the beneficiaries of these two systems are different: In the first system it is the new money creator and those who get money from money creator, in the second system it is anyone who save money
Very well said and diplomatic of you. I also think it's interesting to think about and talk about all aspects of Bitcoin. If you are designing a currency system to cope with an expanding economy, you have two choices: Either fix the value of base unit and add more and more base unit (today's fiat money system); or fix the total amount of base unit, and add more and more value for each base unit
If people are used to a floated currency value, either way will work, but the beneficiaries of these two systems are different: In the first system it is the new money creator and those who get money from money creator, in the second system it is anyone who save money
August 09, 2013, 02:37:22 PM
i vote to replace base 10 with 64.
August 09, 2013, 12:25:20 PM
If I'm breaking a gold bar in two. Do I have more gold? or Does my gold worth more??
No.
Adding more zeros does not change anything to the value nor the supply at all. It just allows more smaller piece so everyone can have some if a satoshi comes to worth a lot. That's all
No.
Adding more zeros does not change anything to the value nor the supply at all. It just allows more smaller piece so everyone can have some if a satoshi comes to worth a lot. That's all
+1
August 09, 2013, 12:15:32 PM
While I don't think the value would change solely because of the decimal places I think that it would allow more people to get into bitcoins, which might in turn lead to greater value.
August 09, 2013, 12:09:58 PM
I understand OP's point of view, adding smallest unit of count gives a feeling that the total amount of the smallest money unit is increased, but as others pointed out, OP mixed base unit with a fraction of base unit. Anyway, OP's thread is very interesting
If you are designing a currency system to cope with an expanding economy, you have two choices: Either fix the value of base unit and add more and more base unit (today's fiat money system); or fix the total amount of base unit, and add more and more value for each base unit
If people are used to a floated currency value, either way will work, but the beneficiaries of these two systems are different: In the first system it is the new money creator and those who get money from money creator, in the second system it is anyone who save money
If you are designing a currency system to cope with an expanding economy, you have two choices: Either fix the value of base unit and add more and more base unit (today's fiat money system); or fix the total amount of base unit, and add more and more value for each base unit
If people are used to a floated currency value, either way will work, but the beneficiaries of these two systems are different: In the first system it is the new money creator and those who get money from money creator, in the second system it is anyone who save money
August 09, 2013, 12:07:52 PM
*. Adding more decimal places does not equal to creating more money out of thin air, it still takes same amount of electricity and mining hardware/software to mine each coin, just the smallest unit will have lower cost (and lower value too). "Money out of thin air" only applies to fiat money today, since they have nearly zero cost
*. There is no such thing as "printing more money and handing out "stimulus checks" to every citizen", where is this impression coming from?? All the printed fiat money belongs to FED, they never handing out a dime to any citizen, it is the government who borrows money from FED and hands out checks to every citizen, and government accumulated huge debt because of this
*. If decimal places are not enough, people will just use some off-chain transaction services for small amount of transactions, and those off-chain services will have the same effect as adding more decimal places
*. There is no such thing as "printing more money and handing out "stimulus checks" to every citizen", where is this impression coming from?? All the printed fiat money belongs to FED, they never handing out a dime to any citizen, it is the government who borrows money from FED and hands out checks to every citizen, and government accumulated huge debt because of this
*. If decimal places are not enough, people will just use some off-chain transaction services for small amount of transactions, and those off-chain services will have the same effect as adding more decimal places
August 09, 2013, 12:07:27 PM
TL;DR: OP is wrong because he doesn't understand decimal places. Move along.
August 09, 2013, 12:02:29 PM
I never cut my steak because if I cut my steak I would have more steak and I would get really fat. I don't want to get fat, so I just eat my steak whole.
Wait, couldn't we solve the world's hunger problems by cutting my steak? I mean if we cut my steak that would be creating more meat. Then we could give that meat to the rest of the world and no one would die of starvation!
I just solved world hunger. Let them eat steak!
Lol very pragmatic.Wait, couldn't we solve the world's hunger problems by cutting my steak? I mean if we cut my steak that would be creating more meat. Then we could give that meat to the rest of the world and no one would die of starvation!
I just solved world hunger. Let them eat steak!
BTW
This is common knowledge in the Christianity, they just prefer to use fish and bread to illustrate the principal.
August 09, 2013, 11:53:51 AM
From time to time I see mentioned the concept of "adding more decimal places" to Bitcoin if the need for more subdivision was required.
I VOTE AGAINST EVER ADDING FURTHER DECIMAL PLACES TO BITCOIN.
Wouldn't adding more decimal places be effectively be printing money? It would literally be creating more money availability out of thin air.
Sure, those who already possessed bitcoin would just have more bitcoin, as the decimal place would be sliding over in their favor.
But this is the same as printing more money and handing out "stimulus checks" to every citizen.
"Ohh, look I got free money" (actually your money just got diluted because everyone else just got more too, and on top of that: there would then be a new, greater total of currency in circulation than there was before, which devalues it all. AKA inflation)
If additional quantity of money is needed because of overpopulation, then a new currency should be created-- Not modifying the existing and altering the very principles which it's based on and stands for.
I VOTE AGAINST EVER ADDING FURTHER DECIMAL PLACES TO BITCOIN.
Wouldn't adding more decimal places be effectively be printing money? It would literally be creating more money availability out of thin air.
Sure, those who already possessed bitcoin would just have more bitcoin, as the decimal place would be sliding over in their favor.
But this is the same as printing more money and handing out "stimulus checks" to every citizen.
"Ohh, look I got free money" (actually your money just got diluted because everyone else just got more too, and on top of that: there would then be a new, greater total of currency in circulation than there was before, which devalues it all. AKA inflation)
If additional quantity of money is needed because of overpopulation, then a new currency should be created-- Not modifying the existing and altering the very principles which it's based on and stands for.
The reason why printing money is bad is NOT because you "create it out of thin air" and NOT because it increases the money supply. The reason why printing money is bad is because the value of the new money is stolen from the old money: The old money is "diluted". It effectively is a redistribution of wealth (or tax on savings).
This is NOT the same as adding more decimal places, because adding more decimal places affects everyone equally! No value is being stolen from anyone, it only displays differently.
(If you still don't understand: The reason why money printing is bad is because it is NOT distributed equally, as opposed to moving the decimal point)
August 09, 2013, 11:20:20 AM
August 09, 2013, 11:15:00 AM
Adding more decimals would not be printing more money. Remember when we had the half penny?
Yeah but then you could just keep arbitrarily adding decimal places again and again. Suddenly the Bitcoin economy would look like this: 21,000,000.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001That's a lot of units of currency.
I suppose the bitcoin-rich would be even richer in a situation like that.
You are failing economics hard.
Every bitcoin would be affected. There would be no increase in value. If we added a single decimal everything that cost 1 BTC would then cost 10BTC, 2 decimals 100BTC. Math mother f'er do you speak it?
you got it wrong too, if you add more decimals, 1 Bitcoin is still equal to 1 Bitcoin, you simply create a new name for 1/1000 BTC which equals to 1 [new unit name here] and which assumes 1000 of 1/1000BTCs and life goes on.. you do same with 1/10,000 or however else it needs to be split up further in the future, but 1 bitcoin always will equal 1 bitcoin.
I would accept that I am failing semantics ;-)
The value is what is important to me. No one would become richer through changing the decimal point unless that change somehow added value.
Jump to: