Topic: Sending coins to trash -- probably the biggest threat to bitcoin (Read 4269 times)

Hmmm... How about a hint then?

Can you explain the difference? To me the main driving factor of "Gold 2.0" phenomenon is bitcoins store of value function.  That's the only real similarity to gold that I see, and (at least to me) apparently the only reason people keep referring to bitcoins as "Gold 2.0".

What is this "poison pill"?

But a storage of value is valuable.  Speculation that a store of value will gain value should be expected.  Why demonize it?

How do you get all miners to agree to this?  How do you prevent miners from secretly retaining a key they "destroyed" in order to retain large volumes of wealth?

Also, why is it so bad that bitcoin acts like a "Gold 2.0"?  The world needs something like gold that does't require physical storage and can be easily transported worldwide.  Why would you want to destroy that?

Basically you could invert the idea of Gold 2.0 and create the same kind of economy the US is based on.

Is this why you are obsessed with the validity of the statement that 1 bitcoin could still service the entire world and keep referring to a "vaccine to gold 2.0"?

Why do you and others still assume that when I'm discussing deflation or inflation I refer to BTC exchange rate fluctuations? Remember, I don't speak the GOLD 2.0 dialect... I speak straight up BTC!

Are you interested in learning how to speak proper BTC (will be offering classes soon)? In the meantime, may I suggest that you take maximum advantage of the GOLD 2.0 era exchange rates.

Man, you tech guys are extremely patient. How on earth did this question about a basic economic misconception reach 3 pages?

The world’s most popular digital currency really is nothing more than an abstraction.

Did you mean to write deflationary spiral?  Or??

Thanks for confirming that I have correctly interpreted the second point in SgtSpike's answer. Unfortunately, this now means that I have to go back to the drawing board and figure out at what point it would make sense to add more decimal places in order to avert an inflationary spiral that will eventually result from lost coins (if we ever succeed at building a flourishing BTC-based economy around the bitcoin protocol).

I know that the issues I'm trying to bring to the miners' attention may appear somewhat odd at this point, but please take note of the inferences that I've made throughout this thread, as understanding them would prove essential in a miner's ability to take maximum advantage of the GOLD 2.0 era we're passing through right now. I don't think that it will be years before I can finally share (in layman's terms) what had clicked in my head after I came across one of Gavin's old tweets, back in 2011 (see a hard copy below). It's just I haven't yet found a professional writer (with background in bitcoin and economic theory) to help me put the right words on paper, so to speak. Why would I need a professional writer? Well, as some of you may have already noticed, any attempt that I take to construct a structural argument around BTC money supply (not monetary base units, a.k.a. raw bitcoins) it only seems to take everyone's attention away from the main points of that argument... It appear that I'm just not cut out for explaining intricate things in prose.

figure out at what point it would make sense to add more decimal places in order to avert an inflationary spiral that will eventually result from lost coins

We call the current minimum protocol unit the satoshi because it was the first such unit, and we are sentimental creatures.  That unit has no other special features. 

It appear that I'm just not cut out for explaining intricate things in prose.

Unfortunately, this now means that I have to go back to the drawing board and figure out at what point it would make sense to add more decimal places in order to avert an inflationary spiral that will eventually result from lost coins ...