Well the same way you get satoshis right now. You either mine yourself or find someone that can provide you with them.
Yeah, that seems quite easy. Why didn't I think of that? [/sarcasm]
Don't worry. There will be a market for those satoshies for sure.
Estimates of people who own some bitcoin range from 3'000'000 (Coinbase, BCI claims) to 300'000 (me). The latter is my estimate of how many people own at least 1 BTC; together,
those users own 99% of all bitcoins in existence.
So, how many bitcoiners do you think know enough about the bitcoin protocol to understand how they can get get their transactions executed in one chain only; and know how to do that without messing up their wallet file; and can obtain a few satoshis that were mined after the fork; and are interested in handling split coins; and can find buyers who can also do all of that; and are dumb enough to buy coins that may die in a few days?
Those that have coins in Coinbase or other third-party wallets will execute their transfers on the fork that the third-party will choose. They will not have the option to taint their coins to make a transfer on the other fork because they will not be able to do it using a third-party wallet.
Also if a hard fork occurs you can be damn sure that there will be announcements everywhere and also the third-party wallet provider will let their users know about the hard-fork and what to do. It sounds logic to me to do that. You make it sound like the sky will fall, when in reality it will not fall. Take a xanax and chill.
Yes, I have observed already that, for the fanatic bitcoiner, *every* detail of bitcoin is a feature; and *everything* that happens is "how the system works".
Sorry, but it is a bug that the coins on each branch may or may not be moved independently, with most clients being unable ot understand or control what is happening.
Hackery is what you propose to do: move coins independently on the two branches by tainting them with coinbase coins, and sell the version you think will die to anyone fool enough to buy them, or to anyone naive enough to not understand what he is buying. The 100 block delay was probably meant to discourage that kind of hackery after forks -- soft, hard, or accidental.
It is your opinion and you are free to have one. But don't act surprised if people laugh at your opinions when it comes to Bitcoin knowledge.
Correct. More precisely, any UTXOs that were created before the fork exist and can be used on both branches. If you try to move them without tainting, they will be moved on both branches, to UTXOs that are still untainted. Once you get hold of some satoshis that were mined on one branch (either one), you can first move all your old UTXOs on that branch to new UTXOs, with tainted transactions, and then you can move again the same old UTXOs to still other UTXOs with untainted transactions, that will be executed only on the other branch (because on the first one those outputs are already spent).
Finally we agree on something.