80 sats \ 5 replies \ @hueso 30 Jul 2023 \ on: Is btc's distribution a threat to adoption? bitcoin
Check out the GRIN project. It tackes the distribution along with the privacy problem.
I knew about Grin. The lack of pre-mine helps, of course, but pre-mining is only one of the ways that distribution gets skewed -- the fact that, post-btc, whenever new projects are announced a million people pounce on it and mine the shit out of it skews things massively -- not technically a pre-mine, but definitely a thumb on the scales of distribution. Is Grin different in this regard?
reply
It's not just the pre-mine, it's about the emission schedule.
Take Monero or Dogecoin for example, both have a very steep emission curves, with the vast mayority of the coins mined on the first months/years after launch, disproportionately favouring early adopters. It's not technically a premine but has the same results in practice, that can be considered scammy.
Grin has a linear emission schedule, which disincentives speculation and promotes a fairer distribution, with inflation tending towards zero.
Bitcoin sits at a middle ground: its halving schedule favors early adopters but not as much as Monero/Doge.
reply
It's a good point -- all of these things (pre-mine, emission, the resultant distribution, the identity of who the coins have been distributed to) are all elements in how monetization and price discovery unfold.
That said, I'm less certain than you seem to be that the 'right' answer is known. The exponentially decaying distribution of btc may have been the key to its success, creating stakeholders who had a giant vested interest in building it out and getting it accepted. (I'm not sure if this is true, but it's not an idea you can dismiss out of hand, imo.)
The success of Grin -- or lack of it, from a price standpoint, vs Monero for instance -- might be evidence of that, too, although there's a lot more in play, obviously. I also think Monero's tail emission strategy is sound. I expect that btc will wind up doing the same thing in a decade, though it is heresy to suggest it. We'll probably know the answer in less time than that.
reply
Isn't that the shitcoin where some anonymous developer dropped a white paper on some forum? I was still into shitcoins when that came out and that cheap marketing ploy was one of many small steps to maximalism.
Anyway, Darth isn't here so I'll fill in... But shit.. I'm in somewhat of a good mood.. Okay, okay. "Don't do shitcoins kids, they turn this egg-standin-for-a-brain into this omelette-standin-for-brain-on-drugs..."
reply
What's wrong about it? I agree with "don't do shitcoins" (99.9% of altcoins are) and it's good to be skeptical but attacking some project just because it's not Bitcoin makes no sense.
reply