13 ms·
Is Dogecoin Capped?
- darig 6y agoIs time itself capped?
- vxxzy 6y agoSo long as individuals want to transact on the Bitcoin network, miners will be there. There IS something to be said about all this “off chain” settlement — let’s hope Coinbase and others remain honest. For that matter, what stops individuals exchanging private keys instead? And, oh yeah, USDT...
- andrewfromx 6y agoI think Cardano (ADA) which is releasing https://roadmap.cardano.org/en/goguen/ https://roadmap.cardano.org/en/goguen/ very soon will be where the miners go, to stake vs. mine that is. ETH 2.0 has issues https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26936244 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26936244 but ADA from get go has been a stake culture. And stake means no more wasted electricity. It's like Satoshi Nakamoto back in 2008 had this great idea, then Vitalik Buterin had a +1 idea but Charles Hoskinson is fixing this whole proof of work mistake from years ago.
- anonymoushn 6y agoYou can also use various PoS networks that already shipped smart contracts and aren't vaporware.
- christiansakai 6y agoI am surprised that people still think Cardano is a vaporware. The code is there, the smart contract pioneer program just launched, people are enrolled in it. The Africa deals are there. The NFT capability and NativeToken capability is there. What is vaporware about it? There are easier ways to scam people than just building those stuffs out. And yet we laugh on flat Earthers. Look at what I found here.
- lhorie 6y agoAnother interesting coin is Polkadot (DOT), which, similar to Dogecoin, has no supply limit, and similar to Cardano, uses proof of stake.
- encryptluks2 6y agoAlgorand already has smart contracts and seems a lot more efficient and developer friendly than Cardano.
- andrewfromx 6y agoI stand corrected, Charles Hoskinson and Silvio Micali are fixing 2008 mistakes.
- gruez 6y ago>For that matter, what stops individual exchanging private keys instead? add a few more steps (to prevent your counterparty from cheating you) and you got the lightning network.
- gnopgnip 6y ago> For that matter, what stops individuals exchanging private keys instead? This could work if you were only making transactions with people you trust, at least in the short term. The main risk here is anyone with the private key could transfer the contents of the wallet. The seller could even sell the same wallet to multiple people. So you need to get the blockchain involved and transfer it to a wallet that the previous seller no longer has access to.
- practicalpants 6y agoYes, Dogecoin's inflation rate decreases with time and eventually hits zero. The crypto community thinks Dogecoin embarrasses them and it's become cringey watching them react so severely to it. It's a fun thing no more risky or silly than NFTs.
- skybrian 6y agoIt started out as a fun joke, but we found out that when you cross a joke with a actual working cryptocurrency, you get a cryptocurrency, and it doesn't matter how ironically we used it way back when since the similar bad stuff is going to happen as with other cryptocurrencies. No worse than NFT's, sure, but NFT's are crazy.
- arcticbull 6y agoIt's a mirror for the crypto community. All the same arguments they make for the supremacy of Bitcoin are actually better made with Doge. - Doge is the best performing asset class of the last decade. - Doge is the best performing asset class of all time. - Doge has lower transaction fees ($1.24 vs $20). - Doge has 10x as many blocks, so much more capacity. - Doge transactions are much faster. - Doge has a dog on it. Frankly it's better in every way than Bitcoin and this makes the maxis very sweaty. It's making them scared for their paper windfalls.
- fastball 6y agoHow is Dogecoin better performing than Bitcoin, even on a decade timescale? BTC was $1 in 2011, so 50,000% gain in a decade. Definitely not better performing of all time, as before 2011 Bitcoin was also worth pennies at various points (just like DOGE). Except now BTC is worth $50k and DOGE is worth $0.30.
- arcticbull 6y agoSince it came later you can set the Doge price in 2011 to $0 and see in fact it was an infinite gain. It needn’t be around as long to be the best performing asset of all time. The fact ones worth $50K per unit and one $0.30 per unit is irrelevant because one has astronomically more units.
- eloff 6y agoThere only being 21 million bitcoin doesn't matter because that can be subdivided into 100M Satoshis. The whole world would have to adopt it for us to run low on it, and maybe not even then. But the fact dogecoin is inflationary is interesting. A currency needs to be inflationary or people hoard it instead of spending it, see bitcoin for an excellent example.
- ekianjo 6y agoPeople still hold dollars even though its inflationary.
- Alain-lf 6y agoEdit: After rereading the article, I now understand that you were referring to this quote in the article : "The circulation number is not enough". You are right, the fact that it's divisible render this point moot. I thought you were saying that dividing coins somehow decreased scarcity (Yes, I've seen many people argue that, believe it or not). Original comment below : I find it really mind boggling that some people don't understand that dividing a pizza into 100M pieces does not give you more pizza.
- eloff 6y agoThat's the wrong way to think about it. The number only matters as long as it can subdivided sufficiently to buy the smallest priced thing. You're thinking of it as a fixed sized pie and thinking dividing it doesn't make a bigger pie. But it's not fixed, the whole pie can grow as bitcoin increases in value. It's up to one trillion dollars now.
- trts 6y ago> When Bitcoin started, however, profiting off Bitcoin was not the primary goal. Everyone in the crypto world believed that this virtual coin would one day change how we use money. It will free us from governments and banks’ control over our financial system. But that goal no longer exists in the crypto world. stopped reading here. People have hoped to profit from bitcoin since the beginning. And while there probably aren't a lot of crypto people thinking that BTC will become the medium of (common) exchange, ending government fiat control of currencies is certainly a primary concern among people in the space, and many are building "layer 2" solutions (such as Lightning) with the goal of facilitating smaller and faster transactions and using bitcoin (or other) as the settlement layer.
- VHRanger 6y agoHow cute, people still think lightning network is a serious attempt rather than plausible deniability to keep the crypto speculation charade going. Just 18 more months, my friends. It'll work as designed in 18 months from wherever you are in time.
- aftbit 6y agoIt works as designed right now, but it's still designed for crypto nerds, not normal people. I've gotten an open balanced lightning channel using electrum but it was not easy or cheap.
- anonporridge 6y agoDesigned for crypto nerds is the wrong way to describe it. It's designed to be a fundamental building block that can be configured and built on top of in many different ways, some of which will be ease of use for a non technical end user, though that will still take a lot of work. It might be the case that self custody of coins is just unavoidably hard, and only those willing to go to some abnormal effort can realistically "be their own bank". But no crypto has solved this. Self custody is just intrinsically complicated and riddled with pitfalls.
- latch 6y ago
- Finnucane 6y agoThe article equates usd inflation with the increase in the supply of dogecoin, but the two charts measure completely different things.
- kerng 6y agoCan you elaborate? I was recently thinking similar to what the article mentions and wonder about differences?
- nostromo 6y agoI’m not the commenter, but I agree. Inflation shows how much prices have risen in a given year, not how many new dollars are in circulation. You can measure inflation in the US economy using any currency - gold, USD, BTC.
- insert_coin 6y agoInflation can be increases in prices, and it is used in this way by most modern economists, except hard money economists to whom inflation is by definition the increase in money supply irrespective of prices. In this sense, inflation is what causes price increases but isn't price increases. The article is talking with this second, or original definition of inflation.
- arcticbull 6y agoInflation is calculated from the increase in prices. It's a measure of the drop in buying power post facto. The earlier definition is incomplete as it does not take into account velocity. For instance, if you print a $1T coin and hand it to me, then I throw it into a vault, supply went up but nothing changed with respect to prices, because velocity went down commensurately. The earlier definition does not match observable reality.
- insert_coin 6y agoThat is only because what you are interested in IS price increases. If what you are interested in is money supply, and you call that inflation, then it doesn't matter what you do with the money, you can store it, you can burn it, you can spend it, is all the same. It doens't matter if prices go up either, that is irrelevant under this definition of inflation. Inflation used to mean money supply. Inflation now means price increases. People thinking they are talking about the same thing when they use the word inflation is where the confusion is coming from.
- victorbstan 6y agoThe inflation rate is increasing in the chart even though the article claims it is decreasing.
- phailhaus 6y agoTheir argument is that the rate of inflation itself goes down over time. But then they claim that makes the coin "deflationary", which isn't true.
- arcticbull 6y agoA rate of increase that drops over time isn't intrinsically inflationary or deflationary. It exerts inflationary pressure, but inflation is a function of both supply and velocity. We'd have to actually measure to determine. Its increase in price means you can buy more goods with it, which means it has demonstrably been insanely deflationary.
- krupan 6y agoThis article states downright untrue information about bitcoin: False: "Everyone in the crypto world believed that this virtual coin would one day change how we use money. It will free us from governments and banks’ control over our financial system. But that goal no longer exists in the crypto world." False: "The circulation number [of bitcoin] is not enough." False: "As of this moment, Bitcoin mining is not profitable anymore, including the Bitcoin rewards."
- Dopameaner 6y agoAny source on the miner statement. Would love to get my research itch satiated. Thanks
- krupan 6y agoIs a source needed? Why would anyone be mining if it’s not profitable?
- paulpauper 6y agoor use validator nodes like XRP. no inflation, tiny fees, no mining, instant tx. i always use xrp if offered
- gruez 6y agoIf you're going in that direction you might as well use visa or instant ach.
- lottin 6y agoThis is not sound analysis, as it revolves around the mistaken notion that a currency is inflationary or deflationary depending on its supply. This is not the case, there are other variables involved. For a cryptocurrency to be inflationary or deflationary, or have a predictable price at all, it would require a governing body that is capable of adjusting its supply as needed. Since they don't have that, because the whole point of cryptocurrencies is to do away with central banks due to a strange paranoia, cryptocurrencies are neither inflationary or deflationary, but simply price unstable.
- anm89 6y agoYou are stating this like it's a fact and a known quantity but the reality is that it isn't. Many countries who manage their money supply have wildly unstable currencies. Turkey for example. On the other hand many economists belive Nobel Prize winner Milton Friedman's assertion that "Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon" (more economists disagree with this probably, my point being that these are not settled matters) And we have absolutely zero long term evidence of how currencies with pre determined supplies behave. So, sure, state your case, you might be right, but don't make it out to be like this is some law of physics.
- carlob 6y agoNot OP, but I think you are misreading their point. They didn't say that having a governing body is a sufficient condition for having a stable currency, they said it's necessary. It might not be a settled question how monetary policy affects inflation, but cryptocurrencies effectively have no monetary policy apart from a ramp decided when they are created. That doesn't take into account lost wallet keys or number of people using it and mining it...
- eruleman 6y agoEthereum is pioneering a new monetary policy with EIP 1559 (which is going live with Berlin fork this summer). Under EIP 1559, each block will burn ETH — the amount of ETH burned increases as blocks fill up. The ETH burned can offset & exceed the ETH block issuance. Over time, if ETH block space is full, the amount of ETH will decrease.
- omnibrain 6y agoThe real trouble are the whales: https://bitinfocharts.com/top-100-richest-dogecoin-addresses.html https://bitinfocharts.com/top-100-richest-dogecoin-addresses... The biggest walket owns a quarter of the coins. The Top 100 own over half of all coins. They can send the price down as much as they like.
- Cicero22 6y agoIf they dump their coins the price will certainly be going down to 0. Is there any historical data on these wallets you're aware of? I'm curious how many people have sold off their holdings. it seems odd to me that so many holders haven't sold yet.
- ebcode 6y agoI've given this a (small) bit of thought. With regard to the whales, it occurred to me that if one (or two, or more) of them all decided to sell at the same time and crash the price, the effect would be to disperse all those coins amongst the "non-whales". And then the question is, well, is the coin more or less valuable when it is held by more people? It seems to me that it would be more valuable, since there would be more people using it. So even if the immediate effect of the whales cashing out was to lower the price (to something above absolute zero, assuming there will still be buyers), the long-term effect would be more adoption, and increased value. I'm sure there are holes somewhere in that logic, feel free to point them out.
- omnibrain 6y agoYes, if they do it, it may end this way. But if they do nothing (or not a whole lot) you can never be sure if and when they are going to start to dump their "wealth". So you can't really accept Doge as a significant payment because you always have to fear that the next moment someone ist going to crash it "for teh lulz".
- hellbannedguy 6y agoWas Dodgecoin ever called anything else the first year? I remember having them on my computer, but can't find them.
- simo7 6y agoI think people should not think that much in terms of supply-demand for speculative phenomena. At least not in a macroeconomic sense. The value of a coin is determined by the expectation of selling it in the future at a higher price, nothing else. These expectations are affected by the supply level only via auction dynamics: lots of newly mined coins in a short timeframe tend to result in big sell orders and downward pressure on the price. That's an effective but also very limited way to impact the price. For instance the increase in supply of a non-speculative asset reduces its marginal utility: the more oil available the less useful it becomes. But there's no theoretical limit to the price of a coin and therefore no limit to the return one can expect! As it's all about auction dynamics, a highly inflationary speculative asset with well-timed and strategic increase in supply could very well defy any macro supply-demand logic.
- scld 6y agoWas this article written by a human? Doesn't really seem so.
- jl2718 6y agoThat is definitely not the monetary inflation history of USD. This is: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/BOGMBASE/ https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/BOGMBASE/
- capableweb 6y agoThe source used in the submission is this: https://www.statista.com/statistics/244983/projected-inflation-rate-in-the-united-states/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/244983/projected-inflati... That source seems to be "U.S. city averages" (relative) while your source seems to be " Monetary Base by Millions of USD" (absolute). You'd have to convert it into relative values in order to compare it I guess.
- jl2718 6y agoThe article was about supply inflation, not price. The Doge CPI is -99%.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- chmike 5y agoHow can dogecoin have 10x faster transactions than Etherum and BitCoin ? I know the method used by BitCoin with the miners. What is the method used by dogecoin to be so fast ?