Topic: Why Satoshi did minting RIGHT (Read 4165 times)

Einstein was maybe more gifted in I find his ideas beautifully insightful but Satoshi's invention is revolutionary, it will save the world.

Re point 2. 50% of coins are mined, and 99% of early adopters haven't even heard of Bitcoin yet. This thing needs to scale and a few thousand people owning half the money in the world is going to severely hamper growth. I love the gold analogy, I wish Bitcoin would have followed it more actualy. Gold was not mined in abundance in the prehistoric times it came in slowly and will go out slowly.

The minting rate proposed above, would take a few years to generate any volume. But by the time Bitcoin sees growing pains the masses will still be encouraged to get involved in the system. 

As discussed elsewhere I see a problem with deflation affecting adoption.

Yeah I made it that way to experiment whether it would help stabilize hashrate a little bit more for alter chains. In fact it might help proof-of-work chains more than it does to ppcoin, as ppcoin does not depend on hashrate for security.

As to Satoshi's minting design I think it's good enough as he had a lot more important things to deal with. Two things are crucial to his mint design:
1) Money supply is capped/fixed so people can have confidence with the first crypto-currency.
2) Early adopters are rewarded nicely so Bitcoin gets started.

So Bitcoin got started successfully I'd say he accomplished all he needed to with the mint design. Maybe not perfect who knows, but already a job well done to me.

Folks should give more credit to Satoshi what he did is a monumental task. I wrestled with bitcoin design and code in order to create ppcoin, so I understand how hard it was to create Bitcoin. Satoshi is like the Einstein of crypto-currency, we should all thank him for bringing the gift of cryptocurrency to humanity.

I think he got it almost perfect; I think it would be improved if the distribution was optimised to benefit the early adopters of Bitcoin.  

With BTC you are the one that keeps the reward and you are also often the promoter - that is similar to pyramid/ponzi schemes.

Anyway this is completely off-topic as I never said BTC was a ponzi dammit only ponzi-LIKE in the way the first coins were distributed. It was just the word I chose, it could have been "IPO-like", "stock-like" or "pyramid-shaped".

You're not the one to keep the reward. It's Mr. Zuckerberg and others.

But Bitcoin has a reward system that explicitly rewards earlier adopters.

I'm willing to bet that there is no reward to a person signing up on facebook first and that half the worlds gold did not become available between 1000 and 1004 AC.

I'm not saying it's a ponzi, only that the BTC minting system has a pyramid shape.

I bet for that 10.000$ u won't buy even a bottle of nuka-cola.

Agreed.. we are early adopters.

The bitcoin system is great. I am a huge believer in gold and silver and this certainly has some of those qualities. Anything is better than pure fiat funny money.

Gold prices are rising. PONZI!

Don't confuse ponzi with network effects. Facebook isn't a ponzi but its value increases every time a new user signs up.

I laugh everytime I read ponzi or pyramid mention when talking about Bitcoin.  

Its a fixed asset that had a lower value when it was launched then today.  No one could predict it would gather the confidence and widening support as it does today.  What is great is people's greed will finally dislodge the early coins once the price gets high enough that they decide to sell their coins.

I don't know whose side you are on sunnankar, but when we can't "appeal to consequences", then we go into ga-ga-land. (I hope etlase realizes that cause-effect is like ALL of science)

Guess I can't tell my kid not to touch the hot stove either, pain is emotion right? Burns are consequences right? Can't base statements on that, no sir!!!

(oh right shoot my analogy is a strawman or "false" right? Guess etlase is always right no matter what, now that's some axiomatic logic!)

Why do you think so?

I mean if you personally hold a large part of all BTC ever to come, don't you have the largest conceivable incentive to spread the word?

Yes later adopters might disapprove of your advantage over them at some level, BUT Bitcoin is useful to everyone and hence the main barrier to adoption is that people simply haven't heard about it or understood it - at least that is my assumption.

What do you consider the greatest obstacle; information spread about BTC or lower rewards to later adopters?

Well I was thinking more of pyramid schemes where; the more suckers you can get in, the more you get yourself. Its very much similar to a ponzi though and for sure many pirate "investors" were very vocal supporters.

BTC get more valuable the more that join, which is ponzi-like, although in Bitcoin's case the value increase is legit and due to increased economic efficiency.

I tried out bitcoin early on, then I realized I couldn't do much with it and dropped it. Now I regret not mining early on in hindsight.

But I personally think we're still in a early adopter phase.

Probably not even then since we'll likely still be getting more efficient.

why is the distribution ponzi-like?

ponzi would imply that any investment is used to pay old investments. which is not true.

what you (probably) meant: early investors gets more. thats ok as they took/take a huge risk.

btw: last winter the difficulty was lower than the summer before that.

I see. This suggests that there might be a dilemma:
- Bigger rewards make sure people engage early on in risk and secure the network. But it discourages followers.
- Smaller rewards makes sure that people who come later receive a greater piece of the pie, but it may be more difficult to get the cryptocurrency off the ground.

So adoption "fairness" is an important characteristic of the minting logic. That's why the first thing I did when I looked at ppcoin was the reward scheme. But the question is, how do you quantify "fairness"?

I do not neglect to mention all the other projects which bite the dust. As an early adopter myself, I can state with certainty that I took the risk and I should deserve the reward. Unfortunately, our rewards do slow down middle and late stage adoption. This is not optimal.

Wut?