Topic: bitcoin for everyone - page 5. (Read 860 times)

If you expect people pay big bucks for something others get for free, you are mistaking. And not only that others get for free, others get that by "leaking" investors' wallets? Good luck with that.


No. Common people don't afford to pay 10$ and wait 1h for confirming, in order to buy 5$ worth of groceries.


This will end and they will sell in no time if your kind of logic would be applied. If they want to lose money they can do that already with USD.


You started with the finite supply, but you seem to fail to understand it. If I worked for 100$, convert it to Bitcoin and you get 5$ worth of Bitcoin from me, I will call it stealing.


Please stop this socialist bullshit if you want a civilized and reasonable talk. Richness doesn't necessarily mean extravagance, extravagance doesn't necessarily means drugs, and most bitcoiners are middle class, far from rich. So again, keep that for the party meetings.

I think distributing it equally is the right idea here and for that, it would disregard and insult the services, skills, and products that others build in order the earn their own stuff.

I think the best thing to do here to give everyone an even distribution that would help them startup their path but not all of the cryptocurrency evenly distributed.  In that way, people will have a chance to change or ruin their lives as it would depend on how they would spend their cryptocurrencies.

IMO, I don’t think everyone deserves Bitcoin to be in their possession.  Unless people would give proper advice and teach them how to handle it and that's the only way we have.

we are talking here hypothetically.
first exchanges were the bridge to introduce bitcoin - the marketplace of conversion fiat to crypto, the way to come on board for non miners. without them it stayed underground and probably won't survive. but now they become a burden > speculative, evil platforms for manipulation, exploitation and greedy enrichment. for ordinary people to carry on transaction with each other they have no need (unless you want to convert btc to fiat, but why would you do that if you can buy and sell everything with btc / remember we talking hypothetically and about near future /). so in case the fee for holding luge sum of BTC will be implied most of the exchanges will extinct.

exactly, the main limiter for btc to become a mean of payment instead of mean of investment is speed and fee, but as you said yourself lightning network will cure it at some point. i can't see why redistributing bitcoin making it worthless. instead, more people will start using it if it will become more accessible. for now with this spike of institutional buying bitcoin moving further and further away from a common homosapien. and nobody "get money from those actually work for that money - in a way or another - and give it to those who didn't". this will not be a steal but a sale. the point is that every person need money to live a happy/ healthy life. but excess and extravagance leads to all kind of illnesses, physical and mental. same goes with btc, keep what you realy need, rest is for sale.

Hahaha, wake up!
You should visit the reputation board to see how many are friends here.


So you plan a distribution without a redistribution, that is the part that might work, again not in this world but in your dreams yeah, definitely possible.!


Yeah, so my money is also people's money since it's my family's money, our keys our coins not your business!

That aside I'm amazed by the tsunami of users that have finally found out a way to fight poverty, we redistribute all bitcoins so everyone would have some $, how much? Probably 0.000001 cents since at the first sign of a wealth redistribution being possible it means that BTC has stopped serving its main purpose, it will be a useless coin under the control of an entity, goodbye decentralization, goodbye being your own bank, goodbye value.
So everybody could have some BTC as it would be useless.


But, but this time it will work!
This is the time when redistribution and taking everything from the rich will definitely work and we will not all end dirt poor like all the times in history this stunt has been tried. This time!
Whenever there is talk about some money and some having more here comes somebody with the same idea, we should take some who that from that side and give it to that side and make sure the proportion stays right all the time and the object itself doesn't lose value and ignoring all basic economics they still keep pushing this! I don't know why in this case but I have a feeling in most it's not because they care so much about the poor people but it's rather pure envy and the ones that have more.

LE:
How did I miss this one:


There are only 18,700,000 coins in circulation at this moment so it's 15,000,000  not 17,300,000

No offense, you ask a question that has been answered hundreds of times in this forum alone - in short, in about 100 years (2140) the last block will be mined - but there will still be transaction fees - and if Bitcoin exists then, and be used by several billion people ...

What will happen after all bitcoin are mined


Bitcoin is for me personally an alternative, not some ultimate replacement for fiat that has to happen anytime in the future. Therefore, it is not realistic to expect that Bitcoin will be used as you imagine, even now most of those who own it see it as a store of value - and not as a currency. Anyone who thinks the world's biggest powers will ever agree to replace their precious fiat that they control 100% with a decentralized currency with no control lives in a big lie. In addition, 45% of the world's population does not have access to the Internet today, they are completely out of any distribution.

Sooo often is this asked, you cannot imagine. You should use search, really.
After many years, when there will no longer block reward, miners will still receive the transaction fees (which nowadays can go pretty easily to over 0.5BTC/block). Last block came with 1.09BTC in fees.


Maybe you are not aware, but the biggest holders are exchanges' cold wallets. And this means that if you keep money on an exchange you'll pay for that money from your own pocket.
Also, if this was not stated when people have deposited their money into their wallets, then it's basically stealing.


I know a token on ETH network which has a smart contract that makes you pay a tiny amount for the coins you hold in your wallet. So it can be done, but you need a new coin/token for that.


Nope, it won't. You imagine the somebody who doesn't have money for food will buy a smartphone, connect to the internet, get 121$ and then pays 5-10$ in fees to spend it? And then use it for every day currency?
The barrier before using it as currency is its transaction speed and costs, which will be fixed by LN at some point.
If you'd redistribute Bitcoin, you'll make it worthless. Also, as discussed, if you'd do this, you'll get money from those actually work for that money - in a way or another - and give it to those who didn't. Even those who were using Bitcoin will run away from it. You'd make more problems than you'd fix.

nice one! loud and clear.
just one questions poped up in mind reading your reply
> what happend to bitcoin when the last block is mined? how the network will be supported and transactions carried on if miners won't recive any reward anymore?

now back to business.
i wasn't talking about free money/airdrop. i was talking more about redistibuting by "voluntarily forcing" of big holders. those holding huge amounts will not benefit from it or even lose value if they hold huge amounts and not spending/selling it. how it can be possible done i can't even imagin in my wildest imagination. but it will make bitcoin the mean of payment and not of the mean of investment. this most likely will bring the price significantly down but will give bitcoinless chaps opportunities to acquire bitcoins and use them for buying/selling goods and services. and so on > redestribution and as a result equality more or less: 0.00178350 btc / 178350 sat. () per person in the 9,7 bln people world.
this amount can be a golden standart - an average living wage for a common citizen of the world

There has not been a consensus in the world on a currency, and it will not happen.
Many people in the world do not have access to the Internet and about 30% have electricity.
The use of millions of people for digital currencies will weaken the network, it is difficult to maintain the decentralization with millions of transactions in the network.

Why equal distribution to happen? It is not about just most extreme case, but it seems as unlikely to happen case. Because, I am not seeing any possibilities for all world population to adopt bitcoins at any point before the year of 2100 (in best case and it may take another century of time in worst case scenario).

Moreover, bitcoin is another electronic money and all electronic money are infinitely divisible. It means we are having right now 8 decimals for one bitcoin which can be altered to 10 digits or 25 digits or 100 digits if required.

So, we can cope up with any level of population and its adoptions along with 21 million units of bitcoins itself.

Nobody is willing to give their bitcoin for free. Will you give your bitcoin to a stranger? And I can ensure that even when your friends ask you for free bitcoin, you will never give it to them unless they ask for a loan.

Anyway, your calculation is awesome. And by 2050, $1,000,000 will not be the highest price of bitcoin. I guess it will be around $100,000,000,000. The world is heading toward a new era where technology is the main influencer, including bitcoin and the blockchain. So, right now it is a good time to think about bitcoin and how to implement this currency in to your life

For sure the Bitcoin cannot make it for everybody. Bitcoin supply is limited while human is unlimited. I mean human can make new one once there are pregnant lady. Every pregnant is potential to add another person on Earth which additional number the the total population of human. While Bitcoin is limited cannot make new coin that what it is now.

You are not the first coming with this ideas and it's rather frustrating to see them pop up over and over again.
Or maybe you didn't know how to express yourself and convince me. If it "does not mean expropriate and redistribute", then how could you (or the entity redistributing) acquire all those coins, from which some are private property and some are not even mined (and the miners will obviously won't mine them for free)?


This is the part I like. It's the part you no longer sound like you want to teach us how to do it, instead you become open for discussion.
I'll answer, from my point of view:
* how to do it: for Bitcoin you cannot. Only somebody willing to give his own Bitcoin would be able to do that and it'll be with a small fraction of all Bitcoin. That's why I said in a later post to make a new coin for it. You'll have to premine it and send it.
One problem is that nobody will waste electricity for free to send your transactions, since you don't plan to pay them and you may not even have coins for paying them.
Another problem is that if you give it to everybody, it doesn't make it valuable. What's the difference from giving everybody air, water or some sand? Not much...

* is it possible: with a new coin or token, if you also pay the miners (or do some centralized approach) it is possible, but completely useless, because it will bear no value and people will not care about it (and probably won't redeem it)

* will it kill bitcoin or immortalize forever: if it would be possible for Bitcoin it will probably ruin its price.

* will it make the world a better place: nope, sorry. People will either waste the free money, either not hear/care about it or have no means to access it. And if I'm wrong and people will access it, the more access it, the lower its price will go, since most will sell asap for more palpable fiat or food, (or drink), and in a year it will be an old fun story, nothing more.

As you see, I try to give scenarios, not related between each other because the exact thing you "proposed" cannot be done.
Clearer now?

PS. Also the representation of your math is wrong. If you divide Bitcoin to people you obtain Bitcoin. So you'll have to either write Bitcoin as measure unit, either multiply with 10^8 to obtain satoshis.

1.There aren't 21M Bitcoins,because a few million Bitcoins are already lost or will be lost forever.
2.I don't get your idea about equal distribution.OK everyone will get the same amount of BTC,but what happens after that?Some people will lose their BTC due to scams(or forget their passwords and private keys),other people will waste their BTC,buying stuff they don't need or playing crypto gambling.Eventually the BTC will be concentrated in the hands of a few wealthy people.That's how capitalism works.
3.Many poor people in the underdeveloped countries don't have computers and internet.How do you plan to give them Bitcoins?

first of all you sound a bit haughty and arrogant, we are all friends here. no need to be rude  secondly,  who said anything about "give for free the hard-earned money"? equal distribution does not mean expropriate and redistribute. it means redestribute on market base principals. reflow from the oceans to the local seas, ponds, puddles and cups. how to do it? i don't know. is it possible? i don't know. will it make the world a better place? i don't know. will it kill bitcoin or immortalize forever? i don't know.
the point is that people's money has to be people's money/

I'd say it is quite an interesting topic and I like the idea of giving charity or donations. However, I don't think Bitcoin will be a good tool to make it happen because first of all, not everyone has access to this cryptocurrency like Bitcoin so even if you allocated it equally I still don't think everyone will benefit from it. There's a possibility that it might just sit on their wallet and not use single any of it. Perhaps if you will plan to have a kind of charity like this one using FIAT would be much appropriate.

That's an interesting research and calculation that you've made. I think it will be easier to read if you'll reconstruct the post and make it more formal through redesigning it.

At the end of it, with all the number of population that we've got in the world and with bitcoin's limited supply. If you ever had bitcoin whether it's not a whole bitcoin but you hold it with few decimals, you're lucky guy to hold it while the rest aren't even interested holding a few.

I know. Still, this is what OP is suggesting (with his odd calculations and lack of Bitcoin knowledge) and you were too.
However, I suggest you two make a new coin and send it to every people from the world.

(And yes, by this I also mean that if you would - hypothetically - do this with Bitcoin, it will become basically worthless.)

Well, no one has that much money alone so I don't get how you are going to give it and I think that if you have that much money, you should start thinking about giving some of it.

This sounds very interesting, but we are living in a capitalist system. Goods and money are not being spread equally around. So far there are only a small number of political parties who want to transfer wealth between the rich and the poor. The same thing would need to happen with bitcoins. Everybody who has more than 120 USD of bitcoins would need to give their coins away.  How could we force people to do so? If one country would start to enforce such rules that the citizens who have bitcoins would probably leave and relocate to another country. Who here would be willing to give up all his coins?

Yeah, giving out 950 bn USD out of good hearth. Try to understand the size of these numbers, then think again.


I was told that back in primary school: you would be able to get any goods for free. I kept wondering that then why would anybody work at all and how who would produce those goods...
Then the shortages started and they stopped insulting our intelligence with that crap.