the obvious solution is bytecoin. worth 8 times as much 
ROFL!
Topic: Bitcoin's 21million total coin supply hinders it immensely - page 4. (Read 6028 times)
ROFL!
Yes humans are capable of evolving and adapting. if you go look at the amazing things sceinces and doing, we willl be a have to be adapting to the new technology.
Its for psychological reasons like this that we really should consider changing the default unit to a millibit. I have all my wallets switched to show in millibits. Perhaps then people will be like "oh shit son, I have like 3,500 bitcoins", and bitcoin will be 50 cents like the old days!
I think more people would jump into the game in the order of millibits at this point, as well. From an outside view, people don't see that perspective of being able to split one coin seamlessly almost a million times over. Even Jr. Members with 50 some-odd posts don't get it either, so I don't expect joe-consumer to ever get it.
But of course, I can see the headlines now "BITCOIN CRASHES TO FIFTY CENTS!"
*facepalm
I think more people would jump into the game in the order of millibits at this point, as well. From an outside view, people don't see that perspective of being able to split one coin seamlessly almost a million times over. Even Jr. Members with 50 some-odd posts don't get it either, so I don't expect joe-consumer to ever get it.
But of course, I can see the headlines now "BITCOIN CRASHES TO FIFTY CENTS!"
*facepalm
Do we really need to manufacture stuff to worry about? Eventually there will be standard denominations of BTC much like other currency. How will a million dollars ever be real if we don't have million dollar bills circulating?
When I buy goods in the uk that cost less than a pound, I don't think to myself how irritating, that's like 0.18 pounds, I think to myself oh, that's 18 pence, because there's one hundred pence in a pound.
And this is someone that everyone in every country has become accustomed too. The OP is arguing that most people can't distinguish something that they already do distinguish with existing fiat currencies!
And this is someone that everyone in every country has become accustomed too. The OP is arguing that most people can't distinguish something that they already do distinguish with existing fiat currencies!
Quote
Honestly I'd have given more weight to your arguments if you'd said Dogecoin was better because it has constant coin creation. I still wouldn't have agreed with your position! But at least it would have been logically consistent. Right now you just look like someone desperate to pump an altcoin regardless, sorry.
I am not here to pump anything, i dont have the hash power, nor the btc to buy lots of MAC right now. Its the thought and elegancy the dev puts into the project is why i chose it over btc, btc looks way too overrated
there are bigger problems than this, this is not problem at all in reality
adoption is key, simplicity is key
too complicated for general aundience for now
adoption is key, simplicity is key
too complicated for general aundience for now
I think 21 million is indeed a small amount, but it just makes wealth more concentrated. NUmber of coins not too important. Perhaps 84 million ( 4x supply) would be better, but hey, too late to change. Good thing BTC are divisible!
Machine Coin - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/machinecoin-mac-552633
This seems to be limited to 84 million coins, so if there is a problem with 21, won't there be a problem with 84 as well?Every MAC consists of 100.000.000 pieces. Therefore we have maximum 84.000.000 * 100.000.000 = 8.400.000.000.000.000 units.
Really not getting why this is a killer feature of Machine Coin.
Accordingly to studies we'll have 10.000.000.000 people on earth in 2050. To be able to substitute a classical currency we must have enough units for everybody so lets calculate 8.400.000.000.000.000 / 10.000.000.000 = 840.000 units or 0.0084 MAC. Bitcoin will be worse
Only by a factor of 4 which doesn't seem significant.Given that it isn't that hard to increase the number of decimal places in Bitcoin if that is ever needed, an altcoin that merely provides 4 times as much supply to begin with does not seem like it will compete with bitcoin's existing momentum.
Honestly I'd have given more weight to your arguments if you'd said Dogecoin was better because it has constant coin creation. I still wouldn't have agreed with your position! But at least it would have been logically consistent. Right now you just look like someone desperate to pump an altcoin regardless, sorry.
To be able to substitute a classical currency completely replace all currencies
FTFYThis is not a change that's needed now, or any time in the next 10 years.
A classical currency here means Euro/Dollar etc
There should be exactly as many BTC as there are humans on earth.
In this way 99.999% of the global population would be reminded of how fuck they are every time they look at their account balance and it may result in them doing something about it. (The symbol I'd use for 'peoplecoin' would closely resemble a pitch-fork.)
To be able to substitute a classical currency completely replace all currencies
FTFYThis is not a change that's needed now, or any time in the next 10 years.
A classical currency here means Euro/Dollar etc
To be able to substitute a classical currency completely replace all currencies
FTFYThis is not a change that's needed now, or any time in the next 10 years.
I completely agree on above. If it "just need a soft fork" then the Great Dalmutians out there, rumored to have 6 dots on this forum ;-) , should start implementing it.
Amazing how many people are keen to apportion work to others.If you think it is that necessary, start drafting the BIP, or switch to a coin that has your desired 11 decimal places (wtf?) to begin with.
Myself I'd rather developers worked on things that are more immediately useful.
Look ^ bagholders with riches struck eyes, too bad they will be paupers soon with btc tanking
I see. What coin does the Indian cryptocurrency scene use then?Every MAC consists of 100.000.000 pieces. Therefore we have maximum 84.000.000 * 100.000.000 = 8.400.000.000.000.000 units.
Accordingly to studies we'll have 10.000.000.000 people on earth in 2050. To be able to substitute a classical currency we must have enough units for everybody so lets calculate 8.400.000.000.000.000 / 10.000.000.000 = 840.000 units or 0.0084 MAC. Bitcoin will be worse
People have adapted...to two decimal places. The OP has a fair point, from the perspective of the general public. People don't like to deal in fractions of things. People like whole things. Many people still can't even count back change. It's just a reality of society.
Bitcoin may prove to be useful as a store of value and that's where I think it should put it's focus. It should stop trying to also be a currency. It's just not useful. It's not likely to be widely distributed enough to disrupt major world currencies, because there simply are not enough for everyone to have plenty for use.
Cryptocurrencies that are launching with billions of coins, are on the right track as transactional currencies. It may be simply a mental thing, but perception is reality.
I completely agree on above. If it "just need a soft fork" then the Great Dalmutians out there, rumored to have 6 dots on this forum ;-) , should start implementing it.
People is dumb. This is an universal truth that sooner or later everyone realizes. Let there be satoshis, in the digital age theres a need for micro mili payments, for ad viewing, etc. But the monetary psichology of losing a 1 to be remained with 0.02 is too strong.
If i were satoshi, i should have proposed a 10,000,000,000 units coin. To moreless cover the future earth population, assuming a slowing of breeding. And still use satoshis. That will be an awesome way to track how many coins you have compared to other people... "Hey i have the bitcoins of an entire Malasian family! yay!" Dumb stuff like that. But, mind you, the population is dumb. Yep.
Bitcoin has a 21 total of 21million coins that could ever be produced.
That's 2,100,000,000,000,000 Satoshis (BTC0.00000001).If that ever becomes an issue then a soft fork can add more digits.
This is a non-issue.
If bitcoin's had to be traded in whole coins, than yes this would be a huge problem. But of course this is not the case. Perhaps the conventional unit should be made the mBTC which would make a unit worth about .45 based on today's prices, but the number of coins is not a problem.
As others have pointed out, it's a non-issue with the numbers.
I think the bigger problem is their lack of distribution, and if there will be a "Bitcoin 1%" forever. But that's another topic for another day.
Friend and I put together a piece for a Bitnote unit of currency. Kind of like mBTC. Either way, think perception is an issue that could be improved. http://bitnote.co
If bitcoin's had to be traded in whole coins, than yes this would be a huge problem. But of course this is not the case. Perhaps the conventional unit should be made the mBTC which would make a unit worth about .45 based on today's prices, but the number of coins is not a problem.
Look ^ bagholders with riches struck eyes, too bad they will be paupers soon with btc tanking
I see. What coin does the Indian cryptocurrency scene use then?Jump to: