4 ms·
> If you want to have your coin begin as proof of stake you have to have some mechanism for how the initial coins are distributed and that method is usually goi
by simiones 5y ago
> If you want to have your coin begin as proof of stake you have to have some mechanism for how the initial coins are distributed and that method is usually going to involve the creators giving themselves a lot of coins.
Don't Proof of Work coin issuers do the same? Even Satoshi has a pretty large amount of Bitcoin.
- PeterisP 5y agoThe thing is that PoW "works" even in the case where Satoshi-equivalent has most of coins, as the transactions are controlled by the mining power and new coins will be distributed through mining. With PoS, if founders hold most of the coins, then the scheme does not work as they de facto arbitrarily control the transactions and there's no way for a community to get that control unless they hand over the coins - thus, in PoS (unlike PoW) the founders need to solve the distribution problem before the scheme can become useful.
- aaronhayes 5y agoThere were no pre-mined bitcoin distributed. Satoshi mined his coins in the early days but crucially anyone could participate and mine at the same time.
- Yizahi 5y agoI know that in USA legal system there is concept "spirit of the law" and afaik there were cases when a person was intentionally abiding the "word of the law" but breaking "spirit of the law" and was penalized for this. So anyway, Satoshi solo mine and anyone else's solo mine, is not technically a premine, but in a spirit - it is. Saying that solo mine is not a premine is true, but you know, I know, everyone knows that essentially it is exactly the same as premine.
- atweiden 5y agoIn a premine, developers hard code coin balances for themselves into their own ledger prior to public mining becoming available. Satoshi clearly didn’t do this. It’s that cut and dry.
- bhaak 5y agoThe definition of a premine isn't as clear as you put it. Or at least isn't always used in the same way. With your definition, Ethereum only had a 16% premine.
- atweiden 5y ago“Premine”: previous to public mining, coins were distributed. Satoshi absolutely didn’t premine Bitcoin.
- FabHK 5y agoAnd yet, Satoshi has huge holdings just as if premined.
- sparkie 5y agoThat's because the other 7+ billion were not smart enough to compete with him for nearly a year, despite it being made public at the time Satoshi began mining. The "pre" in premine means "before," as in, they mine themselves the coins before they publicly release the knowledge required to begin mining. Satoshi didn't do this. There was no premining of bitcoin.
- atweiden 5y agoPremine means coins were distributed prior to a public mining phase. If public mining was available, and no coins were distributed prior to that, the coin wasn’t premined. Despite the definition of “premine” being extremely clear cut and objective, apologists for premined coins often liberally redefine and butcher the definition for financially-motivated, self-serving reasons: “See, Bitcoin is premined too. XYZ did nothing wrong.” Just to understand how ridiculous this is, if we’re going to redefine premine to mean “any coin perceived to be unfairly distributed”, then we might as well not even use the word at all, because biased investors will use the term to describe every cryptocurrency they’re not invested in.
- hanniabu 5y agoNinja mining is no different than premining
- atweiden 5y agoNinja mining, cripple mining, and instamining are variants of post-launch infidelity. N.B. explicit, out-in-the-open premining can be considerably less of a faux pas, assuming it isn’t obscene.
- psychlops 5y agoThis seems like a very cynical take. Somebody has to mine to keep the network secure. Starting the code and hoping the world starts mining equally is naive.