Topic: Money creation system - is bitcoin creation resistant? - page 2. (Read 1604 times)
This is absolutely correct. But in the existing blockchain system, this is possible only in one case - to facilitate the task of guessing the number when selecting a hash. But on the other hand, it is impossible to make this task too easy, otherwise there will be falsification. This is a dead end inherent in the technology itself. This is normal. Blockchain moves only slowly, but absolutely confidently. Until the cryptography method on elliptic curves collapses. And it could be.
No one knows the specific amount of money in the cold storage of exchanges. It is likely that there is only part of the money of customers, and another part of the money is used for their own investments.
According to Trace Mayer (entrepreneur, investor, journalist, monetary scientist, podcast host, and ardent defender of the freedom of speech. He is known for being the founder of the Proof of Keys movement.) and his calculations 1.9 M bitcoins - more than 10% of all bitcoins- are being stored on exchanges. If that's how much they have on their cold wallets means that they can create ~20M bitcoin based on money creation system and 10% of "mandatory reserves". Those are alarming numbers. It is possible that even now we have ~40M bitcoins.
From the mt gox scam we know that the exchange owners use our funds to invest for their own purposes. Fiat exchanges like coinbase and gemini have enough bitcoins in cold storage and cash that we pay in to cover any major dumps. They must be using any spare for investing
No one knows the specific amount of money in the cold storage of exchanges. It is likely that there is only part of the money of customers, and another part of the money is used for their own investments.
Who thinks how. Is it possible in a decentralized blockchain system to create a register (accounting) of bitcoins based on the same blockchain technology ?. This registry (accounting) should be a consequence of the presence of bitcoin in us, and not the cause of bitcoin, of course. Then you can choose with a registered cryptocurrency to do an operation, or with an unregistered one. Maybe then, the value of Bitcoin will not be subject to inflation for the reasons described in this topic?
I've decided to bump this 10 months old thread because it is important for bitcoin future to discuss it and find solution. At least in my opinion. Otherwise, bitcoin will no longer be coin with maximum supply of 21 M.
This topic is amazing, it opens me up to a space in my head and reflect on Bitcoin and its future. I realize that there are too many forms of business related to Bitcoin and make the value of Bitcoin significantly manipulated. Using a decentralized exchange instead of a centralized exchange will help solve many different issues such as customer asset security, minimize the pump and dump. Currently, there are many people who tend to hold Bitcoin rather than trading, which will result in low liquidity for Bitcoin. The next problem is the congestion of the Blockchain network due to too many people placing orders on decentralized exchanges.Perhaps the reason for the blockchain network congestion is not associated with a large number of people placing orders on a decentralized exchange, but with the problems of the blockchain technology itself. Specialists have long said that a fully decentralized technology works well, only with a small number of transactions per unit time. In any case, this problem is expected and regular; it seems to be called "scalability".
I've decided to bump this 10 months old thread because it is important for bitcoin future to discuss it and find solution. At least in my opinion. Otherwise, bitcoin will no longer be coin with maximum supply of 21 M.
This topic is amazing, it opens me up to a space in my head and reflect on Bitcoin and its future. I realize that there are too many forms of business related to Bitcoin and make the value of Bitcoin significantly manipulated. Using a decentralized exchange instead of a centralized exchange will help solve many different issues such as customer asset security, minimize the pump and dump. Currently, there are many people who tend to hold Bitcoin rather than trading, which will result in low liquidity for Bitcoin. The next problem is the congestion of the Blockchain network due to too many people placing orders on decentralized exchanges.
I've decided to bump this 10 months old thread because it is important for bitcoin future to discuss it and find solution. At least in my opinion. Otherwise, bitcoin will no longer be coin with maximum supply of 21 M.
Judging by the vote posted above by the poster, I would say that I am surprised to see that the higher number of people who voted supported that crypto exchanges are using Fractional-Reserve system. This is really alarming I must say and I think everything should be done to stop the creation of off-chain bitcoins.
Will the purpose of bitcoin creation not be completely be erased if it’s sent to a centralized exchange ? I feel there won’t be much difference between technological advancement and the already conventional system.
Will the purpose of bitcoin creation not be completely be erased if it’s sent to a centralized exchange ? I feel there won’t be much difference between technological advancement and the already conventional system.
Last time I've heard about QuadrigaCX exchange. Its CEO died taking to grave all informations about how its customers funds was stored. Today I've read about rumours that they might be on other exchanges like Kraken, Bitfinex and Poloniex (in fact its ZeroNonCense rapport).
This may double money creation problem. If QuadrigaCX was using fractional reserve system (f.e. printing and selling x5 what they have) and storing their coins on other exchange (which also could use fractional reserve system on those funds (f.e. printing and selling x5 what they have)) than we have x10 and none of those exchanges actually know that they are operating on this risk. That way after 1 exchange crash we may have domino effect.
What you guys think about that.
That the CEO of QuadrigaCx died and went along with all information’s of its customers having to make them align with other exchanges would not be a good reason to support fractional reserve system.This may double money creation problem. If QuadrigaCX was using fractional reserve system (f.e. printing and selling x5 what they have) and storing their coins on other exchange (which also could use fractional reserve system on those funds (f.e. printing and selling x5 what they have)) than we have x10 and none of those exchanges actually know that they are operating on this risk. That way after 1 exchange crash we may have domino effect.
What you guys think about that.
This can just end up eliminating the reason behind the existence of Bitcoin and one of this reason is to ensure that there is limited and transparent supply of Bitcoin and there will not be any kind of possibility to bring more coin and if you say QuadrigaCx should have been printing and selling and selling X5, they probably may not have been transparent enough.
How to fight against bitcoin creation?
We will simply elect such governments that will make such regulations that will prevent centralized exchanges or other services fractional banking.
...What you guys think about that...
The same thing "money creation" was used a little bit differently to buy and sell synthetic CDO's which was the major spike to the 2007 crisis coffin.
Billion of dollars in leveraged bets with insane high risk followed one after another with an added multiplier.
This is how it works:
Synthetic issuance jumped from $15 billion in 2005 to $61 billion in 2006, when synthetics became the dominant form of CDOs in the US, valued "notionally" at $5 trillion by the end of the year 2007 according to one estimate.
Synthetic CDOs are controversial because of their role in the subprime mortgage crisis. They enabled large wagers to be made on the value of mortgage-related securities, which have contributed to lower lending standards and fraud.
Centralized exchanges are cryptocurrency weak point. The whole cryptocurrency could be seriously harmed from them. I won't be surprised if few individuals own majority of the exchanges. Something similar to fractional reserve is most likely going on. Owners could be converting huge amounts of cryptocurrency to fiat and lending them to businesses for profit.
Hopefully in the future it will be possible to prevent cryptocurrency from being sent to centralized exchanges
Hopefully in the future it will be possible to prevent cryptocurrency from being sent to centralized exchanges
I disagree. The hard truth is that Bitcoin and other popular cryptocurrencies like ETH, Litecoin, Ripple etc need greater adoption among the world population in order to help the market prosper in the long run.
I am not a fan of centralized exchanges, but centralized or decentralized exchanges are fine as long as they push for wider adoption of cryptocurrencies overall.
Besides, no matter what, everything in this world(FIAT, crypto etc) are centralized to a certain degree and this will most likely never change.
Im not saying that they are bad and should not exist. Im saying that without transparency they will destroy one of the fundamential reasons crypto exist - limited/transparent supply without any possibility to print more and more coins.
Saying that crypto would become trash but more people will know about them by pump and dumps is not healthy for crypto...
Last time I've heard about QuadrigaCX exchange. Its CEO died taking to grave all informations about how its customers funds was stored. Today I've read about rumours that they might be on other exchanges like Kraken, Bitfinex and Poloniex (in fact its ZeroNonCense rapport).
This may double money creation problem. If QuadrigaCX was using fractional reserve system (f.e. printing and selling x5 what they have) and storing their coins on other exchange (which also could use fractional reserve system on those funds (f.e. printing and selling x5 what they have)) than we have x10 and none of those exchanges actually know that they are operating on this risk. That way after 1 exchange crash we may have domino effect.
What you guys think about that.
This may double money creation problem. If QuadrigaCX was using fractional reserve system (f.e. printing and selling x5 what they have) and storing their coins on other exchange (which also could use fractional reserve system on those funds (f.e. printing and selling x5 what they have)) than we have x10 and none of those exchanges actually know that they are operating on this risk. That way after 1 exchange crash we may have domino effect.
What you guys think about that.
Centralized exchanges are cryptocurrency weak point. The whole cryptocurrency could be seriously harmed from them. I won't be surprised if few individuals own majority of the exchanges. Something similar to fractional reserve is most likely going on. Owners could be converting huge amounts of cryptocurrency to fiat and lending them to businesses for profit.
Hopefully in the future it will be possible to prevent cryptocurrency from being sent to centralized exchanges
Hopefully in the future it will be possible to prevent cryptocurrency from being sent to centralized exchanges
I disagree. The hard truth is that Bitcoin and other popular cryptocurrencies like ETH, Litecoin, Ripple etc need greater adoption among the world population in order to help the market prosper in the long run.
I am not a fan of centralized exchanges, but centralized or decentralized exchanges are fine as long as they push for wider adoption of cryptocurrencies overall.
Besides, no matter what, everything in this world(FIAT, crypto etc) are centralized to a certain degree and this will most likely never change.
Im not saying that they are bad and should not exist. Im saying that without transparency they will destroy one of the fundamential reasons crypto exist - limited/transparent supply without any possibility to print more and more coins.
Saying that crypto would become trash but more people will know about them by pump and dumps is not healthy for crypto...
Centralized exchanges are cryptocurrency weak point. The whole cryptocurrency could be seriously harmed from them. I won't be surprised if few individuals own majority of the exchanges. Something similar to fractional reserve is most likely going on. Owners could be converting huge amounts of cryptocurrency to fiat and lending them to businesses for profit.
Hopefully in the future it will be possible to prevent cryptocurrency from being sent to centralized exchanges
Hopefully in the future it will be possible to prevent cryptocurrency from being sent to centralized exchanges
I disagree. The hard truth is that Bitcoin and other popular cryptocurrencies like ETH, Litecoin, Ripple etc need greater adoption among the world population in order to help the market prosper in the long run.
I am not a fan of centralized exchanges, but centralized or decentralized exchanges are fine as long as they push for wider adoption of cryptocurrencies overall.
Besides, no matter what, everything in this world(FIAT, crypto etc) are centralized to a certain degree and this will most likely never change.
Sad thing is that it applyis to all coins/tokens not only bitcoin. I think that without "proof of keys" we wont be able to stop that. I dont think that decentralized exchanges will ever be as fast and convince as centralized. Traders will alwais choose centralized one.
Good writeup. Centralized exchanges are cryptocurrency weak point. The whole cryptocurrency could be seriously harmed from them. I won't be surprised if few individuals own majority of the exchanges. Something similar to fractional reserve is most likely going on. Owners could be converting huge amounts of cryptocurrency to fiat and lending them to businesses for profit.
Hopefully in the future it will be possible to prevent cryptocurrency from being sent to centralized exchanges
It is very worrying if bitcoin is sent to a centralized exchange, I think it will eliminate the essence of BTTC. with a centralized system, technological advancements will be the same as conventional systems today Hopefully in the future it will be possible to prevent cryptocurrency from being sent to centralized exchanges
Good writeup. Centralized exchanges are cryptocurrency weak point. The whole cryptocurrency could be seriously harmed from them. I won't be surprised if few individuals own majority of the exchanges. Something similar to fractional reserve is most likely going on. Owners could be converting huge amounts of cryptocurrency to fiat and lending them to businesses for profit.
Hopefully in the future it will be possible to prevent cryptocurrency from being sent to centralized exchanges
Hopefully in the future it will be possible to prevent cryptocurrency from being sent to centralized exchanges
It won't be if we - crypto society - won't realise how big thread that is and start to figure aout how to solve it.
I added 2 extra options into poll.
Good writeup. Centralized exchanges are cryptocurrency weak point. The whole cryptocurrency could be seriously harmed from them. I won't be surprised if few individuals own majority of the exchanges. Something similar to fractional reserve is most likely going on. Owners could be converting huge amounts of cryptocurrency to fiat and lending them to businesses for profit.
Hopefully in the future it will be possible to prevent cryptocurrency from being sent to centralized exchanges
Hopefully in the future it will be possible to prevent cryptocurrency from being sent to centralized exchanges
What extra option would you like to see in this pull? I can update it for you and others.
For example something like "idk" "hard to say" "rather not" "maybe", you know less black and white.Jump to: