←back to thread

191 points aorloff | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.604s | source
Show context
throw0101d ◴[] No.44467342[source]
Personally I think that this can be considered on the "bug" side of Bitcoin's finite number coins: if, over time, they are lost, then there's a smaller quantity† of currency that is useable to actually do stuff with.

This can make the 'rate of deflation' that occurs worse:

* https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Deflationary_spiral

* https://isps.yale.edu/news/blog/2014/06/the-perils-of-bitcoi...

* https://crypto.bi/deflationary/

† I am aware of satoshis.

replies(8): >>44467392 #>>44467410 #>>44467413 #>>44467486 #>>44467668 #>>44467917 #>>44469713 #>>44469776 #
Gigachad ◴[] No.44469776[source]
I don’t think that’s much of an issue for usage. Since a bitcoin can be divided in to 100,000,000 satoshis. There would only need to be a handful of coins left accessible for the system to be usable.

Being deflationary I agree is a problem, but not the idea that there aren’t enough usable coins left.

replies(1): >>44471229 #
globular-toast ◴[] No.44471229[source]
Everyone always repeats the "deflationary bad" mantra, but I wonder if it really would be. Is the world really going to come crashing down if people only spend on things they need rather than endlessly cycling through shit they don't?
replies(3): >>44471609 #>>44472748 #>>44472981 #
1. walls ◴[] No.44472748[source]
It's only a problem for capitalism.