..since the equalcoin system
- doesn't yet have a way to publicly track transactions (except maybe through forum thread)
..
And that's exactly the point,
we need a way to publicly track transactions and that's what so called
mining does.
Someone has to do the work of tracking transactions, if you don't reward it, noone will do it.
Those nerds that started this cryptocurrency got rewarded.
Those that keep the system running, by creating blocks and processing transactions that way, get rewarded.
What's unfair about that?
The level of reward is too high - if you assume that Bitcoin will be THE currency of the future. Sure they would deserve to be paid for their work and awarded for their investment, but the people getting in on the ground floor holding nearly all the coins would be just another case of a ponzi scheme.
When I (or any other super-early adopter (super, because we're still in Bitcoins very early days)) started mining, bitcoins were worth close to nothing, so I did work for close to nothing, just the same as people that start today, they will get close to nothing, deal with it.
You're under the false assumption, that early-miners earned a lot by mining.
They didn't!
IF they earned a lot, it's because they kept their coins, so they actually earned a lot by
speculating, not by mining.
And I don't see how it's similar in any way to a ponzi scheme.
In a ponzi scheme those that come in early win, those that come in late lose, which is not the case here, those that came in early might have lost everything and those that come in now, or even later, don't lose anything.
This is just based on the assumption that Bitcoin will be what we use in the future. If you instead consider it a niche payment system that nobody should be using as a store of value, then it's no longer a ponzi.
It doesn't matter what people use Bitcoin for in the future, I'm not assuming anything here, I take it as it comes.
You want to use it as a currency? Fine with me.
You want to use it as a store of value? I'm ok with that too.
Why would or should I care? It's yours, treat it like you wish.
Why should anyone get anything for doing nothing?
That's essentially what ronenfe asked.
No, he didn't.
He wants anyone to get an equal share, no matter if they did any work, or not.
He's assuming that those that did the early work did nothing, which is clearly untrue.
He's also assuming that they somehow got rich doing that work, which is also untrue.
Lots of false assumptions flowing around here.