4 ms·

The early producers of bitcoin were not entrepreneurs. Early production of bitcoins didn't require special equipment and would not incur any significant costs

by lottin 5y ago

The early producers of bitcoin were not entrepreneurs. Early production of bitcoins didn't require special equipment and would not incur any significant costs at all. Note that over 60% of the bitcoins in circulation right now were produced before 2013. This means the adoption of bitcoin disproportionally benefits these early producers who didn't take any risks at all. A change in the monetary system should not produce a redistribution of wealth, why should it? It should be neutral in terms of wealth allocation. This is why I see Bitcoin as a scam. It's a plot to transfer wealth from late investors to early investors, wrapped around some ridiculous libertarian rhetoric.

randomhodler84 5y ago
By 2013 mining was already occurring in a entrepreneurial industrial mining fashion. Large pools. ASICS were introduced in 2012, and created a billion dollar hardware industry. Before that, 2011, GPUs. It was not a risk free operation. All had ongoing energy cost to produce. You said “$1” to make most coins. It is much much higher than this. If you are talking 2010, sure, the sub 100 or so folks that were actually mining and are actually on this board might think they did extremely well for themselves. Some have died with their coins since. Some have had tragic lottery winning misadventure. Of the ones I know, they absolutely deserve it and make the world better because of it. Either way, it’s not like most of the early coins have not changed hands many many times. There are early coins, but the vast majority are not in circulation. It’s not nearly as bad as it seems. Significantly better. And most early holders sold years and years and years ago. Most of the circulating coin today is young. The exchanges have about 1.3M trading today. Bitcoin has redistributed wealth. Especially the early coins, where it was the real hardcore math and crypto nerds that were rewarded. Don’t imagine that the early folks are those NFT and shitcoins shilling charlatans. This is a true cypherpunk revolution.
- yunohn 5y ago
  > Bitcoin has redistributed wealth. Amongst whom? Do you have some studies showing the distribution relative to normal fiat?

by lottin 5y ago

randomhodler84 5y ago

By 2013 mining was already occurring in a entrepreneurial industrial mining fashion. Large pools. ASICS were introduced in 2012, and created a billion dollar hardware industry. Before that, 2011, GPUs. It was not a risk free operation. All had ongoing energy cost to produce. You said “$1” to make most coins. It is much much higher than this. If you are talking 2010, sure, the sub 100 or so folks that were actually mining and are actually on this board might think they did extremely well for themselves. Some have died with their coins since. Some have had tragic lottery winning misadventure. Of the ones I know, they absolutely deserve it and make the world better because of it. Either way, it’s not like most of the early coins have not changed hands many many times. There are early coins, but the vast majority are not in circulation. It’s not nearly as bad as it seems. Significantly better. And most early holders sold years and years and years ago. Most of the circulating coin today is young. The exchanges have about 1.3M trading today. Bitcoin has redistributed wealth. Especially the early coins, where it was the real hardcore math and crypto nerds that were rewarded. Don’t imagine that the early folks are those NFT and shitcoins shilling charlatans. This is a true cypherpunk revolution.

yunohn 5y ago
> Bitcoin has redistributed wealth. Amongst whom? Do you have some studies showing the distribution relative to normal fiat?