4 ms·

I'm definitely not a supporter of cryptocurrency, but it's fair to defend Satoshi here. They did not pre-mine bitcoin. They released the software and started mi

I'm definitely not a supporter of cryptocurrency, but it's fair to defend Satoshi here. They did not pre-mine bitcoin. They released the software and started mining. Anyone else could have joined in at the beginning, Satoshi did not pre-allocate lots of coins, unlike just about every other coin. Now, the end effect is still similar: the early adopters got the lion's share of the coins and the 'cult of bitcoin' is trying to lure in greater fools so that they can cash out, but I think that Satoshi's motives weren't greed. They had a clever idea (however flawed the economics were) and implemented it. Everything snowballed from there. Perhaps Satoshi was appalled by what they had created, and that's why they've disappeared?

Ekaros 5y ago
I don't blame Satoshi. Though maybe the whole thing would have needed bit more consideration on long term viability. Those who came relatively shortly after that... Yeah, I saw enough those who were there to be the next plutocracy...
throwaway82652 5y ago
>They did not pre-mine bitcoin. They released the software and started mining. Anyone else could have joined in at the beginning, I'm sorry but this is a bogus statement. I can't stand when people say this, it's an empty statement, it's like saying "anyone could have founded Amazon". Yeah maybe that's technically true but it didn't happen and the chances of it happening to anyone else were extremely small. The basic facts are this: - most people are not ever going to become miners, anyone launching a cryptocurrency knows this full well - bitcoin was designed to make mining harder and harder over time, making it much easier for early adopters to mine - bitcoin was designed to be deflationary Combine those things, and you get a system where the founders and early adopters are practically guaranteed to gain more wealth than everyone else, like to the point of ridiculous imbalance. And if you have an unpopular token in the beginning it's the same thing as a premine. I don't think this is exactly controversial to point out that bitcoin was designed to multiply the wealth of the HODLers, that's the only reason anyone still cares about it.
- thebean11 5y ago
  Amazon is not a scam and anybody could have founded it. Both those statements are true so I’m missing the analogy.
  - throwaway82652 5y ago
    >anybody could have founded it No they couldn't? At bare minimum: A lot of people were babies or were not even born yet when Amazon was founded. A lot of people were not in the financial position to go do a startup in the 90s. A lot of people did not have computer science or business skills at that time (and still don't). A lot of people just did not ever care about buying and selling books online. I'm sure you can think of a lot more examples here. And if Amazon was trying to push a new AmazonBucks cryptocurrency as the new global currency with Jeff Bezos holding a large percentage of them, then yes I would probably call it a scam. Remember when Facebook basically tried to do that a few years ago?
    - thebean11 5y ago
      Yes, people born in the 1400s couldn't have founded it..good point? I think it's pretty obvious that I didn't mean literally everyone (the unborn, dead, sick, disabled etc). In your post you even said it's "technically true" that anybody could have founded Amazon, so I'm not sure why you're trying to get me on an obvious technicality here.
      - throwaway82652 5y ago
        Again, the reason bitcoin is a scam and Amazon is not, is because Amazon is not trying to promote themselves as a currency. Regardless of their stock price or how rich the founder is, Amazon is still a productive company that does useful work.
        thebean11 5y ago
        Sure you could make that claim but not sure how a comparison to Amazon furthers it. Bitcoin is a currency and therefor a scam, Amazon is not a currency and therefor not a scam?
tromp 5y ago
> Satoshi did not pre-allocate lots of coins By designing half of all bitcoins to be emitted in just the first 4 years, they ensured that early miners like Satoshi would end up with a large slice of the pie.

Ekaros 5y ago

I don't blame Satoshi. Though maybe the whole thing would have needed bit more consideration on long term viability. Those who came relatively shortly after that... Yeah, I saw enough those who were there to be the next plutocracy...

throwaway82652 5y ago

>They did not pre-mine bitcoin. They released the software and started mining. Anyone else could have joined in at the beginning, I'm sorry but this is a bogus statement. I can't stand when people say this, it's an empty statement, it's like saying "anyone could have founded Amazon". Yeah maybe that's technically true but it didn't happen and the chances of it happening to anyone else were extremely small. The basic facts are this: - most people are not ever going to become miners, anyone launching a cryptocurrency knows this full well - bitcoin was designed to make mining harder and harder over time, making it much easier for early adopters to mine - bitcoin was designed to be deflationary Combine those things, and you get a system where the founders and early adopters are practically guaranteed to gain more wealth than everyone else, like to the point of ridiculous imbalance. And if you have an unpopular token in the beginning it's the same thing as a premine. I don't think this is exactly controversial to point out that bitcoin was designed to multiply the wealth of the HODLers, that's the only reason anyone still cares about it.

thebean11 5y ago
Amazon is not a scam and anybody could have founded it. Both those statements are true so I’m missing the analogy.
- throwaway82652 5y ago
  >anybody could have founded it No they couldn't? At bare minimum: A lot of people were babies or were not even born yet when Amazon was founded. A lot of people were not in the financial position to go do a startup in the 90s. A lot of people did not have computer science or business skills at that time (and still don't). A lot of people just did not ever care about buying and selling books online. I'm sure you can think of a lot more examples here. And if Amazon was trying to push a new AmazonBucks cryptocurrency as the new global currency with Jeff Bezos holding a large percentage of them, then yes I would probably call it a scam. Remember when Facebook basically tried to do that a few years ago?
  - thebean11 5y ago
    Yes, people born in the 1400s couldn't have founded it..good point? I think it's pretty obvious that I didn't mean literally everyone (the unborn, dead, sick, disabled etc). In your post you even said it's "technically true" that anybody could have founded Amazon, so I'm not sure why you're trying to get me on an obvious technicality here.
    - throwaway82652 5y ago
      Again, the reason bitcoin is a scam and Amazon is not, is because Amazon is not trying to promote themselves as a currency. Regardless of their stock price or how rich the founder is, Amazon is still a productive company that does useful work.
      - thebean11 5y ago
        Sure you could make that claim but not sure how a comparison to Amazon furthers it. Bitcoin is a currency and therefor a scam, Amazon is not a currency and therefor not a scam?

tromp 5y ago

> Satoshi did not pre-allocate lots of coins By designing half of all bitcoins to be emitted in just the first 4 years, they ensured that early miners like Satoshi would end up with a large slice of the pie.