Topic: Three ways to save Bitcoin - page 2. (Read 3979 times)

its not worth worrying about large holders b/c they are just part of the market and will always be there.  there's nothing you can do about them and you have no way of predicting what they'll do.  and there will always be some of us who have more money than others.  for all you know they all might all have agreed to not ever sell a coin until the price hits $10,000. 

You're missing the point.

It's not about the actual act of dumping coins, it's about the threat that they could do so at any time and cause economic turmoil, that makes a currency untrustable.  I completely agree that it would be better if someone dumped all of their coins early on.  It would spread the coins so that a single person doesn't have that kind of power anymore.  But, with early adopters STILL holding on to Bitcoins, that threat is still there.  And it will be there for a long time, even if those early adopters DO move their coins, simply because we wouldn't know whether they just moved them to a set of addresses they own elsewhere, or whether they actually sold them to a variety of people.

In summary:  Dumping coins causes a currency to become unstable (with regards to its value), and the threat of dumping coins causing a currency to be untrustable.

If someone was dropping huge quantities of bitcoins to "control" the economy, they would be diluting their power pretty quickly. Basically it is better that someone dumps all of their coins now and causes the ripples in the economy when it doesn't really matter much.

It doesn't matter whether they are currently doing so or not.  What matters is that they have the capability to do so.  You can't trust a currency when people have that kind of power over it, even if they profess to be do-gooders and haven't shown any signs of potential malicious behavior.

No, they clearly didn't (see first 32,000 blocks and how the average time is 13 minutes which is about 4 CPUs worth, and never deviated or increased in difficulty), and even if they did, we are talking a few hundred dollars for millions in profits.


paper shufflers on wall st have caused the worst economic crisis since the great depression by screwing with the currency. It is the exact same power that early adopters have and will abuse.

You are obviously a bitcoin shill so there is little point in saying anything more.

The increase in the quantity of Bitcoins more quickly than an increase in the number of real goods and services being purchased with Bitcoins is responsible for the decrease in price.

how do u know they didn't have to buy hardware?  alot of early miners clearly did and bought lots of it.
i guess the paper shufflers on Wall St would disagree with you about not delivering value as well as they just sit behind their computers and push buttons.
those open source workers are probably speculating on Bitcoin just like the rest of us.

i disagree that they are controlling the economy.  i'd argue that the naysayers are the ones driving down the price and thus the eonomy.  they've flooded this forum with FUD since the Spring.


this is just your opinion.

This + 1.

It's not about having a problem with early adopters being rewarded.  It's about having a problem with a single person holding more than 0.5% of the currency.  That should never, ever happen, or the currency will be subject to the whims of that person.

I never answered because it is a pointlessly rigged question. They didn't have to buy hardware, they paid an absolute pittance in electricity, and a computer spent time and effort to build the block chain and verify tx's, not people. They're not delivering mail in a war zone in the Congo. The only one who had any claim to profit from actual work was Satoshi for coding the software. But it is open source, a type of software that millions of people work on everyday with absolutely no intent in profiting.

I've never said early adopters don't deserve a profit. I've always argued that early adopters sure as shit don't deserve to control the economy. Even if they "trickle in" coins over years, with the hordes accumulated from early adoption, one could potentially INDEFINITELY support themselves, their children, their grandchildren, their great-greatchildren, and so on without ever doing a single thing for the economy once it reached a minimum amount of stability.

Early adopters could have said that they plan on stabilizing the price, could have been completely transparent about it and taken a one-time profit (which would have been in the millions, quite a fair payment imo). But Satoshi especially went to immense lengths to remain totally anonymous and then disappeared. These are not the actions of a rational actor. These are the actions of someone who is looking to pump and dump. And probably already did. Problem is, he still has hundreds of thousands of coins to do it all over again many times.

i asked you before and you never answered:  why do you begrudge the early adopters who put up their hard earned USD's to buy hardware, pay for electricity, spent time and effort to build and secure the blockchain from scratch, and verify tx's when Bitcoin was worthless with the only hope of getting paid off for doing so by a rising price?

wish in one hand, sh** in the other... not that this has any bearing on the problem of early adopters, it only makes it worse if they continue to wait to sell.


I'll pretend this is an honest question: to protect themselves from the machinations of fiat.

In bitcoin, you trade the fed for the early adopters. Early adopters are already machinating. They are controlling the economy to benefit themselves. Withholding currency to drive up demand; placing huge bid walls to manipulate the falling price. Except now the people are nameless and faceless and answer to no authority.

4. Greatly reduce the possibility of people getting scammed/hacked and losing money from it.

And IMO, that is the most important one.  You can scream "be smart" until you're blue in the face, but that won't stop people from doing stupid stuff, and it won't stop Bitcoin from continuing to receive a bad image because of it.

but there hopefully will be a substantial ECONOMY that will use it to trade one day.  this would then drive demand and eventually the price.

also why do ppl invest in gold?  do you understand the fundamentals behind that?

Because people around here have a habit of seeing only what they want to see. I figured I'd help out by emphasizing words that shouldn't be ignored.

WHY do you use so MANY EFFING all-caps WORDS. It makes your SENTENCES read like something written by a HYPER 4-YEAR OLD that is throwing a TEMPER TANTRUM.

Bitcoin is NOT A STOCK. It is a CURRENCY that if you invest in it, it is on the HOPE that early adopters DON'T SELL.

There is no PRODUCT. There is no COMPANY. There is absolutely no basis for any value except SCARCITY.

Any RETURN ON INVESTMENT is in the HOPE that OTHER PEOPLE BUY IN and early adopters DON'T SELL.

A STOCK produces RETURNS by INVESTING YOUR MONEY into a COMPANY, thus giving you PART-OWNERSHIP, that works to improve its PRODUCTION. It does NOT require others to buy in to see an investment return, that is called a PYRAMID.


BITCOIN IS NOT A STOCK. It is NOTHING at all like a stock except that it has a limited quantity and an exchange. You do not OWN anything but a digital trash token. No STOCK starts as being worthless.

why would you assume early adopters would drop a large load of coins at a given pt in time anymore than a Steve Jobs would dump a large load of Apple stock at a given time which he never did?

early adopters of any company usually have an understanding of not disrupting the share price of their stock and will bleed any stock sale they wish to achieve so as not to do so.  and distributing this stock or coin would be a good thing as this would get more coin into the hands of late comers.

Bitcoin is way to early in its evolution to make wild conclusions either direction as to its future.  i personally see all the right principles, philosophy, and economic incentives in place in the code.

Lawl

right on towards 0.25 LTC per BTC and beyond 

OP is right, Litecoins are the future!