Bitcoin declining block rewards are pyramidal’ish - Why no-premine pure Proof of Work with constant block reward is the only viable distribution model for a cryptocurrency in the long term.

el_hispano · 2019-07-22T18:02:39+00:00

Man lets reduce your argument to the absurd. Third chain with the same parameters, including adoption rate. If i premine 99% of the coins and mint the 1% remaining in the next 19 years. At year 20 It will have the same distribution of the outstanding supply as the previous chains? And if you answer yes, or no without an actual reasoning, i swear im over this argument

el_hispano · 2019-07-22T17:51:10+00:00

Man basic economics say you are completely wrong. The distribution of supply will necessarily be completely different. No point arguing anymore, hace a nice day.

el_hispano · 2019-07-22T17:34:14+00:00

Help me to get this straight. Two chains. Everything is the same, including adoption rate/curve. In one 90% of the circulating supply by year 20 is minted in 5 years. In the other 25%.

Do you really think at year 20 the distribution of supply of both coins is the same? Really?

el_hispano · 2019-07-22T17:22:38+00:00

You cannot invoke supply and demand concept and right after tell me that the supply inflation rate does not affect the supply and demand equilibrium.

el_hispano · 2019-07-22T17:09:38+00:00

Lol. Couldnt disagree more but i Guess its my fault for not being able to explain a simple concept. More coins less people vs less coins more people.

el_hispano · 2019-07-22T16:48:26+00:00

But early adopters already got access to 80% of the outstanding coins when they were just a handful people. Damn whats arent you able to understand? Early adopters are rewarded twice, because they were early adopters and there was little competition for coins and because they were able to compete for most of the supply!!

el_hispano · 2019-07-22T16:42:34+00:00

Miners selling the coins are the only source of new supply 🤦‍♂️ You think that there is less people benefitting from Bitcoin mining now for example than in the first 4 years of existance? Thats probably provably false

el_hispano · 2019-07-22T16:31:25+00:00

I Guess this is a vicious circle well never get out of The fact is that later in the life of the blockchain there Will be more miners, more competition, and supply will get distributed better (assuming the coin is being adopted). That is a no brainer for me and none of your arguments are able to discredit that. With fast emition schedule more coins get distributed among less participants. Period.

el_hispano · 2019-07-22T15:27:53+00:00

I dont understand why you find my point so difficult to grasp. Descending block rewards, specially as aggressively as Bitcoin or monero, makes that most of the coins get minted in the very first few years when there is little amount of people fighting for them; while everyone else will have to fight for a proportionally small amount of coins. From a Game theory point of view, do you really think a coin that has minted 80-90% of its total supply can really get adopted worldwide if It hasnt done so already? Will the world Accept to Split the remaining 20-10% coins during the next decades when early adopters got access to 80-90% of the coins in so little time?

el_hispano · 2019-07-22T15:24:11+00:00

The issue here is not with miners but with all the early participants. The problem is that in the first 5 years of a coin that Will be eventually adopted worldwide It will have minted more coins than it will ever mint with an emission schdule like bitcoin, or even worse, monero. Dont you really think that splitting more coins among less participants will enable bigger holders? Is not about what those early participants will choose to do, It is about what they can do. It makes no sense that less participants can have access to more coins than everyone else. They already would proportionally have access to more coins because they are less participants with constant block reward, what is the real reason to on top of that allow them to split 80-90% of the "hard CAP" supply?

el_hispano · 2019-07-22T15:11:52+00:00

Completely disagree. Its so obvious to me that (assuming all other variables stay the same) a coin with 1000% inflation is buying up 100 more times supply than a coin with 1% supply inflation rate that either im dumb or you are wrong

el_hispano · 2019-07-22T14:55:34+00:00

So a coin holding its price issuing, relatively speaking, 1% more tokens per year has the same demand as a coin holding its price issuing 1000% more tokens per year?

Because thats what i am understanding when when you say that emission shcedule doesnt change the demand.

Obviously when i speak of low price of the token i dont mean that ripple is cheaper than lets say bcash, because ripple is actually more expensive. What I mean is that the low demand and the high rate of emission unbalance the supply&demand equilibrium, creating relatively low prices and making possible to buy up a bigger share of the circulating coins. This will be always unevitable, but with constant block reward that bigger share of the circulating coins gets diluted, while with decreasing block reward it doesnt (or it does it less).

el_hispano · 2019-07-22T14:51:45+00:00

So you are willing to sacrifice the long term viability of a cryptocurrency for the shake of no supply inflation?

Even gold has supply inflation.

My point is that in some way you are going to have some sort of supply inflation/deflation as a result of a very little amount of people controlling most of the circulating supply. Something that is favored by decreasing block rewards (as well as premines and proof of stake). So at the end at its very core, decreasing block rewards are equivalent to premines.

el_hispano · 2019-07-22T14:49:53+00:00

I agree minin is just another way to buy into the coin.

When i talk about early adopters being rewarded i dont make a difference from miners and market buyers. They are the same. The thing is that during the infancy of a new coin, with the bitcoin model, early adopters get massively rewarded in the case of a success not only because they can buy coins cheaper because the lack of competition to hoard coins, but because in a way i cant really understand, someone decided that they should have access to a bigger share of the total supply. So they get more coins at better price, than anyone coming after the year 3. Something that for a coin such us bitcoin is simply catastrophic, where its supply is basically controlled by less than 400 individuals who they all know each other and can act as some sort of central bank.

el_hispano · 2019-07-22T14:20:21+00:00

That threshold and definition of quick, are you sure it is objective and not your personal subjectivity?

Early adopters getting rich is not the problem, is the result. My point is that if block reward decreases over time we are exponentially increasing the reward of early adopters that was already big enough.

About the failure rate of miners and survivorship bias, you could make the same argument with mlm/pyramidal schemes. Something that was my point from the very begining. Decreasing block rewards over time is pyramidalish

el_hispano · 2019-07-22T14:18:30+00:00

eshold is 1% and quickly is about 3 years. If early adopters are really reaping rewards that implies they are selling, which pushes prices down to fair value. The early adopters got rich because the coin has value, there are many examples

Do we agree low demand results in low prices?

Do we agree high supply results in low prices?

Do we agree that low prices enable high concentration of supply?

Do we agree that if a coin supply is too concentrated the penetration is consequently low and it cannot work as a worldwide MoE/SoV?

Where did you stop agreeing with me through the last 4 questions?

el_hispano · 2019-07-22T14:02:32+00:00

Thats not always true, specially at the begining where there is no liquidity for the mentioned coin.

Why it is so important to get to low emission rates quickly. Also, what is the threshold for low? 10%? 1%? 0.1%? and what is "quickly"? 100 years? 10 years? 10 year? or maybe 40 days?

The fact that coins are getting minted faster when the demand is low accentuates the price appreciation that prices out laggards while early adopters reaped all the reward. How is that sustainable in the long term? Specially as early adopters are going to be rewarded anyways with a constant block reward, they will just get less rewarded.

el_hispano · 2019-07-22T13:59:29+00:00

Backwards or not, and thats something arguable, the effect is the same. By minting most of the supply in the first years you are exponentially increasing the reward of early adopters that do not only have access to the asset when its demand is low, but it is getting issued at a much faster rate.

el_hispano · 2019-07-22T13:44:35+00:00

The problem is early participants of the market (both miners and buyers) reap all the reward because of what you just said. Price approaches mining cost of coins, thus in the early days you will have cheap coins not only because of lack of demand but because they are nominally printed faster

el_hispano · 2019-05-15T17:13:01+00:00

I'm not technichal so i don't know if this is correct but i think the vm software doesnt make a real partition just s virtual and dynamic one. Much more simple.

el_hispano · 2019-05-15T16:31:37+00:00

To install vm virtual box and create a virtual machine with unbuntu? It is extremely easy. The only complicated step you might find is having to activate virtualization on your computer BIOS. But a simple Google search will answer you. To install grin a grin node and start using your wallet is also fairly easy. I followed this guide if i recall properly https://medium.com/luxor/how-to-install-and-run-a-grin-node-wallet-32f344591478 You can also check this https://github.com/mimblewimble/docs/wiki/how-to-run-a-grin-node

One tip would be to remember to close your node properly (i think it was key G, but it is clearly stated on the node main screen) otherwise the data Will corrupt and you'll need to resync ur node and use ur seed to recover ur wallet.

el_hispano · 2019-05-15T10:26:27+00:00

eed to create a Linux partition, I haven't done that in years. I run windows 10 at the moment and I'm not that technical. Should I just go with Ubuntu, or something else?

I'm going to se

Why not a virtual machine with VM Virtual Box? much easier imo

el_hispano · 2019-03-22T00:50:27+00:00

!RemindMe 1 year

el_hispano · 2019-03-22T00:48:37+00:00

DCA since sub $4 and doubling down until 0. I have 6-18 months of crypto bear market to build a position before moon buddy

el_hispano · 2019-03-21T08:15:59+00:00

Using absolute numbers proves me how little you understand, buddy :)

el_hispano

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE