________________________________
From: coderman <[email protected]>
To: David Vorick <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 5:54 PM
Subject: Re: bitcoin as a global medium of exchange (was Re: Interesting take
on Sanjuro's Assassination Market)
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 5:43 PM, David Vorick <[email protected]> wrote:
>> ... How do you prevent the early adopters from becoming stupid
>> wealthy if the currency takes off?
>high risk, high reward.
>why should early adoption with high risk not pay more than late
>adoption with significantly less risk?
I certainly agree with 'high risk, high reward'. But that begs the question
of, 'how much risk v. how much reward?'. I've already said that I fully agree
that Satoshi should get $1 billion for what he's done. (More, if BTC fully
enables a system like Sanjuro's 'AM'). But, he's getting close to that level
now, and everything I understand about bitcoin is that he isn't going to sell
his BTC's, so he will get far more than that over the next few years. _THAT_
level of 'reward' is absolutely uncalled-for, and I think when the public
learns of that, there will be a great deal of anger. If such a payoff were
absolutely necessary to launch bitcoin, and there were no alternatives, I'd
grudgingly say "yes". But, I can imagine a digital currency with far-less
early-adopter bias. This is particularly true today: We all know that the
world needs something like BTC. At this point, how much real 'risk' would
there be in a new digital currency?
Far less than BTC.
Jim Bell
