[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/biz/ - Business & Finance

View post   
File: 1.16 MB, 2560x1536, external-content.duckduckgo.com.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17575044 No.17575044 [Reply] [Original]

If a cryptocurrency was adopted by the entire world, what would the ideal supply cap be?

>> No.17575113
File: 11 KB, 200x200, BITB.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17575113

>>17575044
50 Billion

>> No.17575254

21 million and infinite decimal places

>> No.17575323

>>17575254
>I'd like to buy a cup of coffee
>That will be 0.000125 Bitcoin sir

>> No.17575359

1,000,000,000

>> No.17575672

bump

>> No.17575688

>happy 2014
/thread

>> No.17575805

>>17575113
>50 Billion
per satoshi

>> No.17576555

>>17575805
based

>> No.17576700

>>17575044
More than btc, but it can work

>That would be 150 satoshis sir

But the flaws of btc are not its cap kek(wich {they} can change)

>> No.17577313

>>17575323
> That'll be 125 Sats sir.

>> No.17577347

>>17575323
Learn about fiat currencies and why Bitcoin is an alternative. You seem to not understand all of this at a very basic level.

>> No.17577375

>>17576700
What flaws? Are you a big blocker? Death to big blockers.

>> No.17577431

>>17577375
>10 minute blocks
>60 minute confirmation time
>no anonymity
>inflation bugs
>blockchain size
>10% owned by craig wright

>> No.17577603

>>17577313
sat dollar parity will happen in our lifetime
this is almost certain

>> No.17577616

>>17577431
only 10 minute block time is actually true from the list. bugs get fixed craig is a fraud and anonymity is relative.

>> No.17577644

>>17575044
50 billion

>> No.17577740

>>17577616
everything i said is true fucker. bitcoin has no use outside of speculation.

>> No.17577796

>>17577740
ohshit. Hope you didnt buy it then

>> No.17577818

>>17577740
bullshit but you can try prove any of it i will laugh at you.

>> No.17578447

>>17575044
>what would the ideal supply cap be?
a fixed one

>> No.17578483

The ideal would not be a hard cap, but a constant new supply rate. Something like 1-2% increase per year. The important part about crypto supply is not that it is capped, but that it is provably predictable.

>> No.17578504

>>17577616
Uh hello, based department?

>> No.17578512
File: 52 KB, 484x252, 1582352555981.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17578512

>>17575044
Bitcoin QR code generator tool and API:

https://www.bitcoinqrcodemaker.com

>> No.17578514

>>17575044
>what would the ideal supply cap be?
2.1 quadrillion satoshis, just as it is

>> No.17578729

>>17577818
everything i listed is a fact outside of the craig wright meme.

>> No.17578807

>>17575044
Supply cap is meaningless. A single Satoshi could be used as the monetary base for an entire galactic federation once lightning lets us send sub-sat amounts.

>> No.17578829

>>17577431
t. Hasn't read the white paper

>> No.17578872

>>17578729
>everything i listed is a fact
that means you can show us your proof right? facts have proof. evidence. verifiable without question or doubt. go on...

>> No.17578987

>>17578872
>60 minute confirmation time
fact, look at the blockchain.
>no anonymity
fact, look at chainalysis.
>inflation bugs
fact, there was two of them.
>blockchain size
already too large for your average person to run a full node, and will only get worse with actual adoption. fact.

>> No.17579062

>>17578987
fuck are you talking about? less than 10 minutes for first confirmation on average and most exchanges accept 2 confirmations (at least all the ones i use do)
also if bitcoin is not anonymous then you can tell my name from this address 1Bz8gDNtwdVWNjsHkXc16JoHucJxrqpPW if you can't then fuck off
was... as in there are none. easily patched no problem life goes on.
blockchain size is not a big issue people will just start pruning it's extremely unlikely that bitcoin will experience a deep reorg say 100 deep. at that point it's all fucked anyhow. so it's safe to discard old block there is literally no use for them.
the utxo and the last 100 blocks are a few hundred megabytes easily fit on a modern smartphone.

>> No.17579095

>>17578987
>>60 minute confirmation time
>fact, look at the blockchain.
Confirmation time is relative to how much you want to pay for the luxury of having your transaction in the next block.

>>no anonymity
>fact, look at chainalysis.
Atms, coinjoin, mixers, etc

>>inflation bugs
>fact, there was two of them.
Btc has the best devopers. If they're susceptible to bugs, all others are but worse so.

>>blockchain size
>already too large for your average person to run a full node, and will only get worse with actual adoption. fact.
Every participant doesn't need a full node. It's nbd b/c the size its increase is equal & opposite to the rate of change in the price of storage.

Lightning already fixes most of these anyway.

>> No.17579125

>>17579095
>Every participant doesn't need a full node.
the alternatives are not all that good. for extra lightweight spv is fine but you give up a lot of privacy.

it's best to run a full pruning node unless bandwidth is an issue like mobile net.

>> No.17579211

>>17575044
Tree fiddy

>> No.17579342

>>17579095
>Confirmation time is relative to how much you want to pay for the luxury of having your transaction in the next block.
right, you have to pay the miner mafia extra money to not get absolutely ridiculous confirmation times. what a shit system.
>Atms, coinjoin, mixers, etc
none of those things help against chainalysis. you'd need to go completely off chain through monero/zcash/dash to get any privacy.
>Btc has the best devopers. If they're susceptible to bugs, all others are but worse so.
bitcoin has an awful, entitled dev team who haven't implemented anything useful in what, 3 years now?
>Every participant doesn't need a full node. It's nbd b/c the size its increase is equal & opposite to the rate of change in the price of storage.
full nodes are crucial for securing the network. blockchain doesn't scale.
>Lightning already fixes most of these anyway.
lightning doesn't solve anything, it creates more problems and vulnerabilities.

>> No.17579347

>>17579125
Imo nodes are similar to testing a bill you receive with one of those markers. Everyone is at risk if they don't do it, but the only people who do are business & larger financial institutions, which is enough to catch forgeries.

>> No.17579504

>>17579342
>right, you have to pay the miner mafia extra money to not get absolutely ridiculous confirmation times. what a shit system.
Price is information. If the fee is too high, pay ahead of time. Most expenses (rent, utilities, etc) are known & fixed. Set the fee to 1 sat/byte & use a wallet that allows replace by fee. If it's not fast enough for you, increase the fee until it is. Again, lightning fixes this.

>none of those things help against chainalysis. you'd need to go completely off chain through monero/zcash/dash to get any privacy.
Privacy is one of the weakest aspects of bitcoin currently. However, chainanalysis can only look back so many hops & atms are completely anonymous. Lightning also fixes this.

>bitcoin has an awful, entitled dev team who haven't implemented anything useful in what, 3 years now?
t. Not a dev

>full nodes are crucial for securing the network. blockchain doesn't scale.
True, but irrelevant. A billion nodes is only slightly more secure than 10000.

>lightning doesn't solve anything, it creates more problems and vulnerabilities.
This is categorically false.

>> No.17579508

>>17575323
>t, actual retard

>> No.17579554

>>17579342
1.
Veritably false
2,
Extremely dumb opinion
3.
Opinion
4.
Opinion
5.
Yet to be seen and still being developed.

>> No.17579562

>>17579508
That post was 8 hours ago retard, coffee now costs 0.000005 BTC

>> No.17579639

>>17579504
>A billion nodes is only slightly more secure than 10000
it's not really about the numbers it's about propagation and isolation. it's easy to see how a naturally and ad-hoc connected random mesh isolating financial services from miners could be beneficial. the only issue is running a network node is cheap as fuck and not sibyl proof.

so we are down to the old way of seeing it if you want a trustless experience you have to run your own node and validate everything for yourself. each and every one of us.

>> No.17579691

>>17579342
>blockchain doesn't scale
i'm not so sure about that... the truth is graphene bch is experimenting with is an interesting as fuck idea adding to that a trustless pruning network would allow 100mb blocks with no bigger burden laid on network traffic and hdd space than 1mb blocks in 2010

>> No.17579825

>>17579691
and you can easily have a trustless pruning network with a slight modification of the consensus algo: basically you include the hash of the determinstically serialized pre-block utxo in every block and miners reject blocks if this hash doesn't check out (this is important) can be done as a hard fork (in block header) or as a soft fork (in the coinbase tx).

after n blocks say 100 you can safely disconnect from the network even tho the network at large will prune the blocks you would need to build your utxo, but instead you will first verify the longest pow chain by headers and then work your way up from a requested utx set that is trustlessly verified by hash and subsequent hashes after updated by subsequent blocks (basically it's impossible to fake it and get away with it even more impossible than breaking the nakamoto consensus)

this way we can truly discard old garbage.