Quote from: T.Stuart on January 19, 2014, 09:23:34 PM

Quote from: Peter R on January 19, 2014, 08:47:04 PM

So, Risto says that 47 people control 3.5M of the 12.1M coins. 3.5M / 12.1M *100% = 29%. These are the "47 powers" that control 29% of the BTC that Williams stated "collaborated to push up the prices to where they are today."

Risto says that 47 + 880 = 927 people control 3.5M + 2.6M = 6.1M. And 6.1M / 12.1M = 50%. And the newspaper article above states that 930 people control 50% of all the coins. Coincidence? Obviously not.

So, we can clearly conclude two things:

1. Risto's deductive reasoning is literally amazing. He was able to essentially guess the exact wealth distribution of bitcoin which has now been verified by multiple independent sources.

2. Prof Williams used advanced methodology from the Science of Economics, and sources including Forbes, to independently come up with precisely the same top-heavy distribution. Using this same methodology, he was also able to show that exactly 47 people colluded to push up the price.

3. We have confirmation that we indeed have confirmed the precise wealth distribution on an individual-by-individual basis in bitcoin. This is obviously the beginning of the end of bitcoin.

You're pushing the boat out a bit there aren't you? So where is your proof of this collaborative effort? I strongly doubt such collaboration but if you have any direct evidence carry on.

I've thought about the wealth distribution. If Bitcoin were only a currency then it wouldn't make sense, agreed. But Bitcoin is not only a currency at all. It is also a payment network, which is inseparable from the currency. In some ways a Bitcoin is also a share, as if the Bitcoin network was a company (digital payments platform). It is not unusual for the founders of a company to hold many more shares than those who buy in at IPO for example. This is perfectly normal.

This way of assessing the situation is certainly more accurate than simply arguing about wealth distribution as if Bitcoin were fiat currency.

I'll re-enter normal 'Peter R' mode because we are not in the 'Confirmed Bad News Thread' (where I reserve the right to unleash my inner troll). My post you quoted (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=420005.msg4606471#msg4606471) was just another parody on bitcoin FUD and our reliance on "experts" and pseudo "confirmation."

Someone from the MSM read Risto's original thread here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=316297), and published an article that implied these wealth distribution estimates were "facts." Then more and more people started assuming they were indeed facts since it was "confirmed" by the MSM. And now we have "professors" like Dr. Williams seemingly "reconfirming" what were essentially "guesses" by some random guy from an internet forum, and then adding things like "these 47 people colluded to push up the price."

After I embraced my inner troll (thanks to Proudhon) a couple of days ago, it's really opened my eyes to the extent of misinformation everywhere. Even people in prestigous positions parrot the latest FUD without ever checking the original source.