Topic: Soon all bitcoins could end up in one hands? (Read 2494 times)

i am saying that a small group of people maybe accumulating majority of bitcoins right now on our eyes

I am not sure that I see people trolling, we just do not clearly understand your argument. The charts you linked show the price of bitcoin increasing recently. Are you trying to say there is more people buying and holding for speculative purposes? Or, are you implying that early adopters with a large stash of coins have more "power" now that the price has increased?

troll troll trolll
that is all everyone ever does now ((((  facepalm

Where I was saying something like "you will not be able to use bitcoin"?
i said that ther will be few powerfull owners for most of coins and mining, and they would influence deficit and price situation like nothing befor

Actually what he did was mearly present facts, actual data of what happened, if you wish to draw a different conclusion to reality you are of course welcome to, I've no idea what an 'exelance' is btw, an old executable file made by a guy called Lance? 

I think it's actually quite interesting to look at Google in the context of competition. Google isn't technically a monopoly in that the search market is a competitive one and there are numerous actors in it (Bing, Yahoo, etc.). But because Google holds such a huge portion of most search markets (I have a vague memory of someone saying it's approx. 90% here in the UK) that it does have monopolistic characteristics.

That said, there's definitely something to be said about the strength of Google's brand and its heritage in maintaining that market dominance.

Then mine alternate currency.

I don't seen what the big deal is

Google is neither unspoken, nor a monopoly.  In either case this entire argument seems like a non-sequitur.


Not. It would create great demand, but with an essentially infinitely divisible currency such as bitcoin there's no practical situation whereby they can run out. Which is why I'm unsure what you envision the core problem to be - $100,000 bitcoins?

On a side note, someone who comes across like they were taught to read by a cellphone probably shouldn't be tossing around insults casually. Spelling and grammar may be superfluous to your genius, but there are few other methods on an online forum that readers can rely upon to form an impression of you and your ideas. I would also argue that it implies a certain clarity of mind, but I won't beat a dead horse (feel free to use cliches, however).

and ofcourse i did not mean every single last one of btc... OMG    i was talking about majorety of them, that would create extreme deficit
and stop comparing altcoins to bitcoin its ridiculous.

maybe you dont know but there are unspoken monopolys in some fields  ... like google,for example, is the search leader....  very few chip factorys and so on.
if they would want to sell their products for btc would it creat great deficit for bitcoins or not? ))

where is the exelance? he made totaly wrong conclusion
do you realy think that after a stagnet 100$ for half a year  everyone sudenly desided to buy bitcoins all together? lol

public consensus? concious and united society ?  LOL
greed is much more likely then what you have sugested)

Read Franky1's excellent post again, pretty much says it all very clearly

If there were a wide consensus that the distribution of bitcoins were too lopsided for the public good, I feel it would engender public support for an altcoin.  The core principles of Bitcoin would be retained, but the current ledger would be abandoned by market forces in favor of a new one.

Incidentally, I also believe this to be a public democratic control over the 21 million limit.  Right now, consensus favors the limit.  If there ever becomes a consensus that the number of circulating bitcoins (and the associated ability to fractionalize coins) is insufficient to meet the needs of society... the segment of society that favors an increase will solve that problem by accepting an altcoin that is perceived to meet the need.

ofcorse mil btc transferd in last month, million  was boghtt last month...
omg guys try to understand what i am trying to say,
my asumption is not a fact but it looks like been right.  
with stagnet 120$ exchange rate for a long time there was no reason for masses of general public to buy millions of coins...
also exeption of bitcoin by BaiDu kind of rings a bell )))

It is a bit of a buying spree at the moment, plenty of new adopters.

Us normal people do not have bottomless pits of money to buy Bitcoin.  We will eventually have to start spending instead of hoarding, which will be good.

When we start spending merchants will be happy and more merchants will want some of the action.

a few things to note about circulation first


when a coin is in the exchange it is locked in a third party service. thus it is not being spent on a retailer website. to me this is the same as me storing my FIAT in a bank and the banks are playing the Forex markets. meaning my money is not in circulation (being spend in retail)
i know that this is not entirely the case as "we" are the banks, so yes it is in circulation whether in an exchange or in our personal wallets to be used. so dont count wallet stored or exchanged stored funds as in or out of circulation.

the true way of knowing what is in circulation and what is hoarded is to look at the 12million coins. and compare it to the total coins 'transacted' over a period.
EG
http://blockchain.info/charts/estimated-transaction-volume
820,000BTC transacted today compared to an average 300,000 a day for the last few months.

so in actual fact less coins have been hoarded now then ever before.

what you will notice though when it comes to exchanges is that for instance last year MTGOX was storing upto 150k of bitcoin at any one time.
but today only 12,500 coins.(12561.4 coins at the exact second of doing screenshot)


this proves that when supply ON THE EXCHANGE is low the prices go up.. even though there are more coins being transacted today instead of cold stored (hoarded in personal wallets). meaning that retail or peer-2-peer trading is increasing and there is more circulation. exchanges are seeing a decrease in circulation.

Thus you have to ensure you understand the difference.

now back to the topic title
. knowing that if a rich guy wanted to buy up all 12564 coins on MTGOX it would cost 77,662,796,314,500 for that  very last satoshi, then he would have to do the same at bitstamp, vircurex, btc-e and then try calling out to the public for their cold stores, for him to EVER have the chance of ever owning "all the coins"

so i dont think anyone will ever own all the coins

Correct me if I am wrong, but the masses start buying something when this 'something' is going up in value significantly. Greed is a strong driver, perhaps the strongest, and there is nothing to be done about this, just enjoy the ride.

Hoarding is not what bitcoin needs right now. We need to spend and get retailers to think that they are missing out on business by not accepting bitcoin. That's when the masses will all start buying bitcoin driving the price to atmospheric levels. At that point hoard all you want.

Merry Bitcoin everyone!!

with pure @buy everything@ for 2 month you dont need to do that to come to my conclusion

No - for you to say that coins are no longer on the exchanges you need to look at the order books for each exchange. Confidence in the market may lead to sellers increasing the price they want to sell for. As long as demand is sufficient, then you will see a higher equilibrium. There is not necessarily a change in market depth, but the price has risen.

are you playing dum or trolling? if price stayd the same it would mean that all coins reterned to the market. but they did not, it is pure buy and stash

Well, no, that wasn't what you said. You said 2 million bitcoin have been withdrawn from circulation. The charts you linked to do have nothing to do with that. They simply show the trades on each exchange...!