5 ms·

I'm making analogies so that you have to substantiate your argument. It isn't clear that just because there is a large number of something, the entire ecosystem

I'm making analogies so that you have to substantiate your argument. It isn't clear that just because there is a large number of something, the entire ecosystem must be worthless, which is what you originally said. You can't clone bitcoin at no cost. To clone bitcoin you would have to invest the same amount of energy that has been expended thus far to proof of work.

jqpabc123 5y ago
It isn't clear that just because there is a large number of something, the entire ecosystem must be worthless, which is what you originally said. You're misinterpreting my original statement and ignoring my explanation. If too many people can easily make the product, the market quickly becomes saturated ... There are not 10,000 companies listed in the stock market all producing the same type of product.
- datadata 5y ago
  My point is that the number of cryptos/websites/stocks doesn't matter at all. A saturated market does not lead to a failed market, a saturated market just means there is demand for something. Sure, most cryptos are probably going to become worthless, but all it takes is one to work, and one that isn't easy to copy. In the stock example, maybe 9999 companies go bankrupt, but there is still a market, and whoever survives is going to make money. You are basically saying that there can't ever be consensus because there isn't yet a consensus. That's a possible and maybe even likely outcome, but it doesn't obviously follow.
  - jqpabc123 5y ago
    I am basically saying that allowing anyone to create/clone money at will is an absolutely absurd way to reach a consensus on a currency. On the contrary, it is a really, really good way to avoid one. Don't take my word for it, just look at the current crypto-market. Could it happen? Sure. In the same way that a monkey with a keyboard could produce a best seller. But there is absolutely zero reason to expect or believe it will happen any time soon. But invest now to get in on the ground floor --- just in case.
    - datadata 5y ago
      You'd have to exert the same amount of energy to clone Bitcoin as is being used in it's mining. Because the input energy is scarce, it is not trivial to clone as you are saying. You are also ignoring network effects entirely. Number of users of Bitcoin have increased year after year.
      - jqpabc123 5y ago
        You'd have to exert the same amount of energy to clone Bitcoin ... The cloner would have to exert the same energy to mining that Satoshi Nakamoto did/does --- zero. Others will do this for you. But thanks for pointing out the absurdity/weakness of Bitcoin and one of the reasons why it fails as a currency. You do know there are other options for cloning.
        datadata 5y ago
        That would be true if you could time travel to 2008. In 2022 you have to compete with what already exists, not with how what already exists was created. There are no other options for cloning a PoW blockchain. You would not easily get "others to do this for you" to the same degree that bitcoin already has. I generally agree with you though that cloning a PoS blockchain is easy in this regard, those ones also are protected by network effects.
        jqpabc123 5y ago
        That would be true if you could time travel to 2008. It's more true in 2022, no time travel required. Unlike 2008, the awareness and the operations needed to mine a bitcoin clone are already in place, fully setup and operational, running 24/7. Just offer rewards like bitcoin did back in 2008 and the existing miners will be all over it like white on rice. There is very little additional expense to mining a clone alongside bitcoin. The equipment will be running either way.
        datadata 5y ago

jqpabc123 5y ago

It isn't clear that just because there is a large number of something, the entire ecosystem must be worthless, which is what you originally said. You're misinterpreting my original statement and ignoring my explanation. If too many people can easily make the product, the market quickly becomes saturated ... There are not 10,000 companies listed in the stock market all producing the same type of product.

datadata 5y ago
My point is that the number of cryptos/websites/stocks doesn't matter at all. A saturated market does not lead to a failed market, a saturated market just means there is demand for something. Sure, most cryptos are probably going to become worthless, but all it takes is one to work, and one that isn't easy to copy. In the stock example, maybe 9999 companies go bankrupt, but there is still a market, and whoever survives is going to make money. You are basically saying that there can't ever be consensus because there isn't yet a consensus. That's a possible and maybe even likely outcome, but it doesn't obviously follow.
- jqpabc123 5y ago
  I am basically saying that allowing anyone to create/clone money at will is an absolutely absurd way to reach a consensus on a currency. On the contrary, it is a really, really good way to avoid one. Don't take my word for it, just look at the current crypto-market. Could it happen? Sure. In the same way that a monkey with a keyboard could produce a best seller. But there is absolutely zero reason to expect or believe it will happen any time soon. But invest now to get in on the ground floor --- just in case.
  - datadata 5y ago
    You'd have to exert the same amount of energy to clone Bitcoin as is being used in it's mining. Because the input energy is scarce, it is not trivial to clone as you are saying. You are also ignoring network effects entirely. Number of users of Bitcoin have increased year after year.
    - jqpabc123 5y ago
      You'd have to exert the same amount of energy to clone Bitcoin ... The cloner would have to exert the same energy to mining that Satoshi Nakamoto did/does --- zero. Others will do this for you. But thanks for pointing out the absurdity/weakness of Bitcoin and one of the reasons why it fails as a currency. You do know there are other options for cloning.
      - datadata 5y ago
        That would be true if you could time travel to 2008. In 2022 you have to compete with what already exists, not with how what already exists was created. There are no other options for cloning a PoW blockchain. You would not easily get "others to do this for you" to the same degree that bitcoin already has. I generally agree with you though that cloning a PoS blockchain is easy in this regard, those ones also are protected by network effects.
        jqpabc123 5y ago
        That would be true if you could time travel to 2008. It's more true in 2022, no time travel required. Unlike 2008, the awareness and the operations needed to mine a bitcoin clone are already in place, fully setup and operational, running 24/7. Just offer rewards like bitcoin did back in 2008 and the existing miners will be all over it like white on rice. There is very little additional expense to mining a clone alongside bitcoin. The equipment will be running either way.
        datadata 5y ago