3 ms·

>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

>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?
        throwaway82652 5y ago
        No, neither are currencies. Cryptocurrencies try to promote themselves as currencies, but they're actually not, and they can't ever function that way, for a number of reasons.
joosters 5y ago
> 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". It's true. The software was freely available. Anyone could have run it at the start. Back then, you didn't need specialised hardware. That's a far cry from founding and running a company, I don't understand how this even compares to Amazon (and anyway, Amazon does useful things!) Now, there's a huge world of difference between saying anyone could have mined bitcoin at the beginning, and everyone could have mined bitcoin at the beginning. As I said, and you seem to agree with, the economics hugely favour the early adopters. > Yeah maybe that's technically true but it didn't happen and the chances of it happening to anyone else were extremely small. It's not a question of chance, it was simply a matter of running some software, and being there first. > 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 We're in complete agreement here. But back then, no-one seriously thought bitcoins would be valued in the thousands of dollars. I doubt Satoshi released bitcoin and sat back thinking "now I'll become a billionaire". Now, everyone is into cryptocoins for the money (hence all the identikit coins out there) I wonder how bitcoin would have fared had it not been released with the deflationary logic built in. I suspect it would have been pretty similar. Ethereum has no cap on coins, other than a built-in 'difficulty bomb' that the developers repeatedly keep delaying...
- throwaway82652 5y ago
  >It's not a question of chance, it was simply a matter of running some software, and being there first. And yet many people were still not there, because you have to be a super nerd to even care about this stuff to begin with, never mind go through the bother of: - Figuring out what "mining" actually is and why you should care - Correctly running some random unproven open source code to do it - Manage the wallet and figure out how to actually trade with somebody else - Follow all the other super nerds who are doing this to make sure you're not doing it wrong It goes on and on here, none of this stuff is obvious to people who weren't already familiar with what was going on here and had enough obscure cryptography knowledge to understand what anybody was even talking about. And it's still not obvious, most people "investing" in crypto still have no idea about any of this stuff. I'm not particularly interested in commenting on the founder's intent because it doesn't matter much here. The outcome is still going to be the same. >I wonder how bitcoin would have fared had it not been released with the deflationary logic built in. I suspect it would have been pretty similar. Well yes, because basically every other cryptocurrency including ETH still favors the HODLers for a lot of other reasons.

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?
      - throwaway82652 5y ago
        No, neither are currencies. Cryptocurrencies try to promote themselves as currencies, but they're actually not, and they can't ever function that way, for a number of reasons.

joosters 5y ago

> 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". It's true. The software was freely available. Anyone could have run it at the start. Back then, you didn't need specialised hardware. That's a far cry from founding and running a company, I don't understand how this even compares to Amazon (and anyway, Amazon does useful things!) Now, there's a huge world of difference between saying anyone could have mined bitcoin at the beginning, and everyone could have mined bitcoin at the beginning. As I said, and you seem to agree with, the economics hugely favour the early adopters. > Yeah maybe that's technically true but it didn't happen and the chances of it happening to anyone else were extremely small. It's not a question of chance, it was simply a matter of running some software, and being there first. > 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 We're in complete agreement here. But back then, no-one seriously thought bitcoins would be valued in the thousands of dollars. I doubt Satoshi released bitcoin and sat back thinking "now I'll become a billionaire". Now, everyone is into cryptocoins for the money (hence all the identikit coins out there) I wonder how bitcoin would have fared had it not been released with the deflationary logic built in. I suspect it would have been pretty similar. Ethereum has no cap on coins, other than a built-in 'difficulty bomb' that the developers repeatedly keep delaying...

throwaway82652 5y ago
>It's not a question of chance, it was simply a matter of running some software, and being there first. And yet many people were still not there, because you have to be a super nerd to even care about this stuff to begin with, never mind go through the bother of: - Figuring out what "mining" actually is and why you should care - Correctly running some random unproven open source code to do it - Manage the wallet and figure out how to actually trade with somebody else - Follow all the other super nerds who are doing this to make sure you're not doing it wrong It goes on and on here, none of this stuff is obvious to people who weren't already familiar with what was going on here and had enough obscure cryptography knowledge to understand what anybody was even talking about. And it's still not obvious, most people "investing" in crypto still have no idea about any of this stuff. I'm not particularly interested in commenting on the founder's intent because it doesn't matter much here. The outcome is still going to be the same. >I wonder how bitcoin would have fared had it not been released with the deflationary logic built in. I suspect it would have been pretty similar. Well yes, because basically every other cryptocurrency including ETH still favors the HODLers for a lot of other reasons.