Quote from: gustav on June 11, 2016, 05:13:53 AM

Quote from: AndreaF on June 11, 2016, 04:55:25 AM

You try to negate the reality.

1) It's a FACT that few people can get access to ultra-powerful hash miners
Most of people CANNOT invest tons of money in superminer for speculation, I have a high end home PC pretty expensive and if I compare ,u hashrate to top miners of most popular pools its power i light years distant not even in the same universe.

2) The concept of miners contribute to the currency has sense when the hash power is proportional to the blockchains needs, if there is overmining speculation becames a way to grab as much coins as possible. This concept is very easy to understand. There is monstrous power used in most popular coins mining for few transactions. So say that is only a meritocratic reward is bullshit, It's a gredy game for who has most power.

3) Is for you is fair that few richest people that can affort mining cloud controls most of the money, you have to consider fair also that original developers control most of the coins. To me fairness means a proportional distribution among people... According to you isn't clear what means and what is the "merit concept".

Can you tell me why the next person should pay money for a coin that you got for free? Is that fair for the person that buys that coin from you later? Please explain.

WOW you haven't understand anything of what I have said. If someone create a fair distribution of premined coins obviously this distribution must be FREE so this fair distribution can be the kickstart to create a fair virtual monetary system for all people. This is what I'm saying.

- If developers premine all monetary base and sell to other users is UNFAIR since the developers get the control of the monetary supply
- If developers doesn't premine and the mining is based only on hash power, this is also UNFAIR, since the big companies that can use server farms to mine the coins take the control of the monetary supply.