Topic: Time for second bitcoin ? (Read 1829 times)
Sure.. that's why people who want to keep their CPU workin in the future even if they are not sending or recieveing money will be rewarded by the system, sharinh a small commission fee. This is correct and as I said I think it's all very well thought out. But also.. as I said.. you could have made the initial distribution in other ways still with the same result. You could ie reward first comers for any new user that comes in with their code, in a pyramid chane, until all the coins were distributed. Mining is much better though
"Mining" is transaction processing... once all coins are mined, we still need transactions to be processed.
As said above, mining is not simply a distribution method.
As said above, mining is not simply a distribution method.
As I said it replicates what happens in nature and I think is very well done. Replicating the limitness of a solid item (the opposite for bank notes) assings a progressive and gradually growing value to the coin (towards the end it's more difficult to extract and more rare) so it's also a way to reward first comers (as it should be)... but in the end... bitcoin will work only if it starts to live by it's own as a real coin (or better, as a gold or silver ounce) after is all mined... otherwise we've all played a nice game and, as in pyramid systems, the last will pay the bill. I don't think (and hope) this will be the case anyway.
@barbarousrelic .... I've no techincal, mental or financial resources to start... elsewise.. I would.
@barbarousrelic .... I've no techincal, mental or financial resources to start... elsewise.. I would.
If we think of BITCOIN as gold (limited supply in the world, progressive difficulty in mining, widespread acceptancy, etc...) isn't it time to start out a BITCOIN2 equivalent to silver. Maybe an algorythm issuing 100.000.000 (or more) hashes instead of 21.000.000 ?
Go for it! Competition is good. Mining is just a way they thought to distribute initially the 21.000.000 btc. Distributing randomly, or rewarding the old comers with a pyramid system or any other way would have had the same result. Mining is a very good and fair idea.. It simulates gold in the fact (or any other precious metal or jem). At first is easy because they are on the surface, the ngradually it costs more to go down and only big companies have the equipment and labor force to do so and in the end it get's to a point when it's not worth to mine anymore. Ver y good idea... but .. as I said.. is just a distributing method. If the coin works and lives we will see it in 3-4 years time when it has to "live by it's own"
Mining is not simply a distribution method.
Mining is just a way they thought to distribute initially the 21.000.000 btc. Distributing randomly, or rewarding the old comers with a pyramid system or any other way would have had the same result. Mining is a very good and fair idea.. It simulates gold in the fact (or any other precious metal or jem). At first is easy because they are on the surface, the ngradually it costs more to go down and only big companies have the equipment and labor force to do so and in the end it get's to a point when it's not worth to mine anymore. Ver y good idea... but .. as I said.. is just a distributing method. If the coin works and lives we will see it in 3-4 years time when it has to "live by it's own"
I don't think this as a new/old comer problem. I am a new comer but still I bought (and not mined) bitcoins because I belive in a currency out of governmental control, widespread, without intermediaries, etc... All the mining story.. everybody's concentrated on.. it's just the way they found to distribute the coins in first instance. the main question is.. what will happen afterwards? Will people appreciate the non-inflationability of the coin and the direct transaction system so to make it more requested than dollar, euros, etc.. ? The value of bitcoin is not in the mining.. that's just "a game" (maybe a money worth game nut still a game)... it's in the future.. At least this is my opinion
Mining is essential to bitcoin.
It does if you live in your mom and dads basement and use their electricity.
Someone pays, even if it isn't you. So it's not free money.
I don't think this as a new/old comer problem. I am a new comer but still I bought (and not mined) bitcoins because I belive in a currency out of governmental control, widespread, without intermediaries, etc... All the mining story.. everybody's concentrated on.. it's just the way they found to distribute the coins in first instance. the main question is.. what will happen afterwards? Will people appreciate the non-inflationability of the coin and the direct transaction system so to make it more requested than dollar, euros, etc.. ? The value of bitcoin is not in the mining.. that's just "a game" (maybe a money worth game nut still a game)... it's in the future.. At least this is my opinion
But how will Johnny Come Lately miners be able to get free money? That's the point of this, right?
No, that is not the point. And mining doesn't give you free money either.
It does if you live in your mom and dads basement and use their electricity.
But how will Johnny Come Lately miners be able to get free money? That's the point of this, right?
No, that is not the point. And mining doesn't give you free money either.
If we think of BITCOIN as gold (limited supply in the world, progressive difficulty in mining, widespread acceptancy, etc...) isn't it time to start out a BITCOIN2 equivalent to silver. Maybe an algorythm issuing 100.000.000 (or more) hashes instead of 21.000.000 ?
I don't think of bitcoin as gold. Bitcoin is easily divisible. What you suggest is unnecessary.
But how will Johnny Come Lately miners be able to get free money? That's the point of this, right?
If we think of BITCOIN as gold (limited supply in the world, progressive difficulty in mining, widespread acceptancy, etc...) isn't it time to start out a BITCOIN2 equivalent to silver. Maybe an algorythm issuing 100.000.000 (or more) hashes instead of 21.000.000 ?
I don't think of bitcoin as gold. Bitcoin is easily divisible. What you suggest is unnecessary.
If we think of BITCOIN as gold (limited supply in the world, progressive difficulty in mining, widespread acceptancy, etc...) isn't it time to start out a BITCOIN2 equivalent to silver. Maybe an algorythm issuing 100.000.000 (or more) hashes instead of 21.000.000 ?
Jump to: