11–20 of 115 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You assume that early adopters still hold their Bitcoins. You are (mostly) wrong.
Has anyone ever estimated how many btc might be locked up in early adopter wallets who have since lost the passwords or the hard drive, etc?
It's massively deflationary, which is a terrible thing for a currency.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would it be much different from inheritance? Right from birth, one person is destined to be poor while the other destined to be a millionaire.
So I as a parent from the fruit of my labors have no right to help my children through life? Also please note most millionaires in the world are self made, with over 80%. Of the other 20% most made it to millionaire status before receiving an inheritance. Also note the people you most worry about, the ones who get money young, usually plow through it and leave nothing for their children.
You cannot just state one thing from the side of later comer, and later switch to the side of early comer. That way you are saying 2 things...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would it be much different from inheritance? Right from birth, one person is destined to be poor while the other destined to be a millionaire.
So I as a parent from the fruit of my labors have no right to help my children through life? Also please note most millionaires in the world are self made, with over 80%. Of the other 20% most made it to millionaire status before receiving an inheritance. Also note the people you most worry about, the ones who get money young, usually plow through it and leave nothing for their children.
Unless someone was born into poverty and fought their way out, I don't count them as self made. No doubt these people exist, but it would never be 80%.
If 10x the number of people start getting involved and transaction volume increases 10x as a result, will the network use 10x the energy?
It will be interesting to see Bitcoin sentiment shift as newcomers realize that the bulk of Bitcoin value is held by a small handful of early adopters, and that the bulk of Bitcoin mining capacity is held by a small handful of large mining companies. Cryptocurrency proponents are trying to get ahead of this by reframing Bitcoin as the people's currency, or an opportunity for average people to get rich while sticking…
Yes. So what? I don't think the typical Bitcoin proponent is the kind of person to get outraged at Pareto distributions. They are against governments, they don't hate wealthy people just for being wealthy.
> The problem with that hypothetical endgame is that reallocating the world's wealth according to how early someone went all-in on a cryptocurrency gamble (and how much capital they had to invest at the time) would create inequality at unimaginable scale, not to mention completely disconnecting wealth from societal value creation.
How is that different from having invested in Amazon, Google or Apple in the early 00's?
Bitcoin (and other cryptocurrencies) does bring value to our society as a store of wealth that's not easy for governments to control.
It will be interesting to see Bitcoin sentiment shift as newcomers realize that the bulk of Bitcoin value is held by a small handful of early adopters, and that the bulk of Bitcoin mining capacity is held by a small handful of large mining companies. Cryptocurrency proponents are trying to get ahead of this by reframing Bitcoin as the people's currency, or an opportunity for average people to get rich while sticking…
I understand why you'd want that, fairness is a strong human instinct, but I don't see where it has any bearing on the likelihood of this future occurring.
People don't enjoy having a high number in their accounting system, they enjoy being wealthy. If, say, African central banks start purchasing BTC, and India joins them, early adopters will cash out at whatever value makes them feel like they got their money's worth. Some people will only trade for real property. Some are in a position to hodl until they can buy a whole cruise ship or whatever.
Or they could lose it all when BTC crashes to the natural value of any completely hypothetical asset, which is zero. This still seems more likely to me than central banks taking up a position in BTC, but sadly, I lack the ability to predict the future.
Is it really that different from buying the first iPod, and thinking to yourself, "y'know this is a brand new Apple, I'm putting a few thousand bucks into their stock"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So I as a parent from the fruit of my labors have no right to help my children through life? Also please note most millionaires in the world are self made, with over 80%. Of the other 20% most made it to millionaire status before receiving an inheritance. Also note the people you most worry about, the ones who get money young, usually plow through it and leave nothing for their children.
Wow, it's not unusual to see comments being contradicting each other by switching the side in the distance of one smartphone's screen. You cannot just state one thing from the side of later comer, and later switch to the side of early comer. That way you are saying 2 things...
The first was recognizing that that inheritance mostly came from the labors of someone and they have a right to do with their money as they see fit. The second is acknowledging that the person who didn't work for their wealth usually squanders it so don't waste time being jealous of them.
So focus on being the person who creates wealth for themselves and try to educate your children so they will have good money habits later on in life and will squander less of what you leave them.
It will be interesting to see Bitcoin sentiment shift as newcomers realize that the bulk of Bitcoin value is held by a small handful of early adopters, and that the bulk of Bitcoin mining capacity is held by a small handful of large mining companies. Cryptocurrency proponents are trying to get ahead of this by reframing Bitcoin as the people's currency, or an opportunity for average people to get rich while sticking…
Your problem with this hypothetical endgame is an appeal to fairness. I understand why you'd want that, fairness is a strong human instinct, but I don't see where it has any bearing on the likelihood of this future occurring. People don't enjoy having a high number in their accounting system, they enjoy being wealthy. If, say, African central banks start purchasing BTC, and India joins them, early adopters will cash…
It'll be interesting who's left "holding the bag" once its the end of the MLM-ponzi scheme of who you can convince to buy into it - save regulatory capture somehow forcing the rest of society to buy into it.
How is a cryptocurrency with this type of wealth inequality supposed to help the common person?
It's already centralized, thus easy to manipulate. Bitcoin is reproducing the same type of wealth distribution we see in real life. What exactly does btc offer?
I don't understand how one can look at this distribution of bitcoins, where essentially the 1% owns most of it and people conclude that somehow this is different? That this in your favor as a newcomer? To me this looks like if you buy in now, you're going to become a bagholder for the 1%.
[1] https://bitinfocharts.com/top-100-richest-bitcoin-addresses....
~2.3% of addresses own ~95% of all bitcoins. [1] How is a cryptocurrency with this type of wealth inequality supposed to help the common person? It's already centralized, thus easy to manipulate. Bitcoin is reproducing the same type of wealth distribution we see in real life. What exactly does btc offer? I don't understand how one can look at this distribution of bitcoins, where essentially the 1% owns most of it and…
That seems like a weird assumption to start at.