Topic: Why Bitcoin Core Developers keep on making bitcoin more valuable? (Read 1675 times)

The post does not make sense in so many levels, the core developers cannot force the approval of anything so they are not protecting the value of bitcoin, and second you talk as if a high price of bitcoin is bad for it when it is the opposite a big price for bitcoin is good since those holding bitcoin are more tempted to sell and now new people can enter the market.

I guess they really cant do it i guess the value or price of the bitcoin just depend of the value of the bitcoin in the market also but that was just my opinion so i guess better if they improve the blockchain for the transaction speed and why they dont improve altcoins to become more valuable.

Not sure if its a language divide thing but these posts are ignoring the points I made.



Xester, isn't it miners who get fees? Code developers of Bitcoin do not get any of the bitcoin network-generated fees. Miners do.

The author was funny and you are right in speaking that scaling has no direct relation to fiat currency. The most probable reason why the developers wanted to make bitcoin more valuable is because they want to earn more from the fees. The higher the fees multiplied by the high value of bitcoin the result would be big profit. In the end it all comes down to profit.

The problem is that fiat money is absolutely not what caused the banking crisis of 2007, but rather, wild speculation was.  At no point, it was any monetary policy from central banks that was a direct cause of the crisis, but rather the fact that risky assets (non-solvable loans) were packaged in far too complex derivatives, on which financial institutions gambled and speculated with their balance sheets.   When highly speculative assets come down, blood flows.  That was the 2007 banking crisis.  Not the fact that fiat is slightly inflationary (*).

Now, we all know that rare collectibles get their value from speculation, and lead to hoarding, not something that makes a good currency.   A good currency is only accepted because you want to spend it again, but you do normally not speculate on the value of currency (there are forex markets, but they don't make the currency price, they just surf on it).

So it is somewhat ironic that bitcoin, who *pretended* to become cash, was emitted as a scarce collectible, to become a highly speculative asset, while at the same time, pretending to fight the causes of the speculation crisis of the banks in 2007, and replace the system that is working well (the fiat system).

In fact, you cannot get rich (or poor) with a good cash system.  If you can get rich (or poor) with it, it is a speculative asset, and if it is a speculative asset it is not good cash.

(*) at least, not directly.  There is a link with too easy loans which was encouraged by low interest rates, which were low to be able to obtain some inflation.

point 1:
definition of cash does not talk about its amount of supply. cash simply means money.
"Cash is legal tender or coins that can be used to exchange goods, debt or services."

point 2:
bitcoin was not the first cryptocurrency, it was the first that became big. there were at least half a dozen cryptocurrencies created before bitcoin. the idea was introduced by someone back in 1998. so i believe you are overthinking this.

point 3:
no system is perfect since we are not living in a perfect world.
and i also disagree with this part "Bitcoin will still go up in value so as long as monetary inflation exists ~ the rare times when monetary deflation would occur, Bitcoin should go down in value" people are not using bitcoin because fiat is deflationary so if opposite occurs they stop it! they are using bitcoin because it is decentralized and all that other stuff and this creates more and more demand, and until we reach the point where demand doesn't increase any more price will stop rising.

first of all i didn't say price moved because of "news", i said they can find the reason in the news.
also price did move because of news. at this point when price rises 50% in one month it is because of hyped up news and a small part because of adoption.
the same goes for any other rise. millions of people didn't come out of the blue staring to buy bitcoin to increase the price from $1200 to $1800 it is mostly the same speculators who have been around for years. then a small part is new investors obviously.

I would suggest that you stop posting on forums, while you are using drugs. It shows ^smile^

Bitcoin is built on the concept that Fiat institutions and governments should not influence it's value. The open market will determine it's value. < We have seen what happened when they are in control -- Bank crisis and massive bailouts > Bitcoin is modeled after gold, not Fiat currencies. < The developers had nothing to do with that, it was in the original white paper and the protocol developed by Satoshi >

1 Satoshi is still very affordable ^smile^

Pooya87 thank you - I hope to give you an interesting perspective to your response here:

Wait, both you and Satoshi refer to word "CASH", right? Cash....ok we know cash, US dollar, Euro, Indian Rupee...all cash we know have same thing in common...it is continually issued by central banks, monetary inflation continues to occur. Every decade there is more USD, more Euro, more Rupees, right? BUT WAIT, the Bitcoin whitepaper contradicts this very common notion of cash with a fixed, scarce supply! Why do this? This is something that is very Un-cash-like isn't it? This is point 1.

Point 2, why did Bitcoin emerge in 2009 right after the global financial crisis? Is there any special timing here? Electronic payments were already being acheived by things like Visa, Mastercard, Paypal, Western Union, SWIFT, Square payments, right? Its timing: The global financial crisis 2007-2008 was followed by response from central banks to bailing out some giant corporate financial institutions at the expense of others via monetary inflation to which citizens and honest conservatively-run businesses had no way to block such responses/inflation that essentially devalued their cash-holdings. Control. Why does whitepaper introduce bitcoin with a trustless framework? Why not go with a private database? This secure trustless, distributed proof of work, database known as Bitcoin's blockchain peacefully destroys the centralized framework of monetary authorities' control. This decentralization of bitcoin strengthened it to be headless with no central points of shutdown and thus would help protect point 1 above, integrity of scarce supply. And gave participants protection not only from bank/government-sponsored inflation but also freedom from freezing of assets and confiscation of funds.

Point 3
Does the whitepaper for Bitcoin indirectly indicate to us how cash (savings) should've always worked anyways? That is, that it is showing that systems of cash like USD, Euro, etc are broken (inflationary) and Bitcoin is new-way of defining cash by being deflationary? Deflationary being that even after widespread adoption of Bitcoin (we aren't close to being there), Bitcoin will still go up in value so as long as monetary inflation exists, ie central banks keep pumping liquidity such as USD, Euros, Rupees into the financial system. Conversely, the rare times when monetary deflation would occur, Bitcoin should go down in value. Thus, Bitcoin being secure, decentralized, immutable and scarce, has made it into deflationary cash that may be transmitted anywhere via a communications channel. Deflationary cash is so unique to this sick-central-banked world, that it has quickly turned Bitcoin into the ultimate store of value.

Why mine ~1M bitcoin and not spend it for 8+ years? Integrity, value.
 


I didn't think bitcoin's price movement was dependent on "news". What was the "news" for Bitcoin's price move from $1 to $10? How about from $10 to $100? What was the news for $100 to $500?

those who think bitcoin is a "store of value" not a "currency" should seriously start reading bitcoin's original paper and see what Satoshi (creator of bitcoin) called bitcoin: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

also they have to check the news and see why bitcoin price is rising, hint it is NOT because Japan said bitcoin is a good "investment to store value".

wrong, i do not pay any credit card fees while using them for payment, change your country to somewhere with better banking system haha.

how many people do you think can buy things per block?
each block these days have from 500 to 3000 transactions in it. many of which are spam and useless transactions like the ones bitfury shoves in the blocks.
now do you think that much is enough for this future of yours where a lot of people have been holding and now want to buy stuff with it.

English is my second language and i am a bit dumb so i never get sarcasm

You are right. And thank you for engaging in discussion here (much appreciated). Bitcoin instills a good system (though not perfect) of checks and balances. So then, may I ask, why are some users on this forum so bent on an agenda of begging developers to implement scaling/compromise/etc? Its spreading nonsense FUD in my humble opinion.


Would you agree that already as I type this there are many transactions being transmitted globally crossing geographical divides with Bitcoin? I was able to send a transaction recently pretty easily. So what exactly is this "scaling" that Bitcoin doesn't already do? To buy coffee and a box of matches for a million people at a time? I thought most Bitcoin exchanges already issue debit cards for spending to do this already? Also what incentive would there be to buy coffee using spend/sell a store of value asset (such as Bitcoin, gold, real estate) versus we spend expendible/plentiful cash fiat (or some worthless altcoin) to buy same coffee?

Why wouldn't someone spend the coin that is worthless and hoard the things that are precious (worth-more)? Or are market-participants already doing this naturally?


Don't worry, I agree with you. Thanks for pitching in mindrust. Sorry if you didn't catch the sarcasm, I tried to bring up a few points/questions in my original post hopefully for readers to catch on to me. Sorry I should've been more clear.



Agree, Bitcoin is secure, scarce, globally distributed with many trades in places like Philippines, Spain, China, USA, Russia, India, Brazil, etc...Thank you Velkro.



Xuan, I agree, that is funny how human get drawn to things. Definitely yes, as Bitcoin continues to rocket higher as years pass on by, more and more people/organizations will HAVE to adopt bitcoin as a matter of survival (from monetary inflation). Thank you.

I don't understand why should we lower the price until lower than 1000$, it will attracted more people to invest in bitcoin if the price is expensive, lowering the price will cost people to abandon bitcoin, if bitcoin lower than 1000$ I think a lot of people will invest their coin into other alt coin, bitcoin is start from 1$, it is a long way until it can reach more than 1000$, it is absurd to asked people to agree for bitcoin to back to 1000$

The price is dropping as we type.

You wrote many words, but simple answer to that is they have conservative approach. Quality before quantity or risk, that is why bitcoin code is safe, stable and price CAN go constantly upward.

The answer is simple: keeping bitcoin more valuable is not the business of Bitcoin Core Developers. Their job is keepin the bitcoin and blockchain safe and fast.

I don't understand your concerns at all.. You don't like bitcoin becoming valuable? Are you sure that you are not high? High prices are every bitcoin holder's dream.

Get real. You missed the bitcoin train so you are mad. You didn't buy when it was 1000$, or you dumped your bag back then because you thought it was about to go back to 200$ but it's backfired.

Getting back to 1000$ will do no good to anybody. If you want to make money again, jump right in and hold it at least for a year. Gox dudes endured lots of pain during all those years but hodlers won it in the end and coward pigs got slaughtered.

It is never too late. Next stop is 10k$, buy now or cry later!

You're totally wrong, a milibitcoin only cost $1.7, cheaper than many altcoins. Let's thanks developers for all those decimal places.

This is objectively wrong on so many levels.

The developers can't implement scaling on their own.  Miners have to agree on scaling, so the arguments about scaling just show that the network is decentralised enough not to be controlled by one group.

Furthermore, scaling has no relation to fiat.  The supply would still remain fixed.  No one can just create Bitcoin like the Ethereum or Ripple devs can create their respective "cryptocurrencies".

Bitcoin is supposed to be an effective store of value as well as a currency.  The two should be able to work together.

Why do the bitcoin core developers keep on protecting bitcoin and its value?

As the months go on, they are doing nothing to make the price of bitcoin go down. What action can we do to make them change their ways so Bitcoin price will drop instead of going up? Why doesn't bitcoin core developers make bitcoin easily expendible and unprecious (like fiat cash that goes down in value).

Many are saying the bitcoin community wants scaling to convert Bitcoin from a store-of-value asset (like ultimate global digital gold) into easily expendible, plentiful cash fiat. I think if we get together as a community we can influence the developers to make Bitcoin price to go back down to below $1,000.

What reason do the developers have to maintain integrity of Bitcoin's store of value? Why not just destroy it? Banks and governments will be able to operate easier to control our money if bitcoin wasn't around.

There are so many other altcoins that are very plentiful and expendible, and valued MUCH lower - why won't Bitcoin developers strive to acheive this for bitcoin?

Are the developers doing bitcoin community any favors by letting bitcoin price go up and doubling every 5 years?

Can we let Banks and telecom companies better enter bitcoin space by centralizing some aspects of bitcoin protocol like make blocks larger (thus make investment in network/mining infrastructure a higher $ barrier to enter for smaller competition like us)?

Example for scaling:
Say we want to buy a notebook that is costing us $1,000USD equivalent and you can pay the merchant who would accept from you any of following options:
A) Fiat cash credit card payment (after payment you will have to pay this bill in fiat cash or pay interest with extra fiat cash later)
B) Leaves from bushes or trees green or dead backed credit card (after payment you will have to pay in leaves plus pay extra leaves in interest)
C) Gold oz. backed credit card payment (after payment you will have to pay this bill only in gold payment and interest paid in gold later)
D) Bitcoin backed credit card payment (after payment you will have to pay this bill only in bitcoin and interest paid in bitcoin later)

The problem now is too many people would choose to pay with worthless things like option A) and B) and lots of people would rather be hoarders of bitcoin and hold bitcoin as a store of value. Can the community band together and introduce scaling so Bitcoin can be more like option A) and B)??

To summarize: Action MUST be taken now otherwise people will hoard and keep on holding bitcoin. This will be a problem because bitcoin price will always be higher every 5 years for future. It will become too expensive and people who hold bitcoin will be able to buy too many things like houses and cars and airline tickets and company stocks.