waxwing on Nostr: In which i try to answer the extremely common opinion that bitcoin's early ...

In which i try to answer the extremely common opinion that bitcoin's early distribution was unfair:

quoting nevent1q…jxtl

At every point from day 1, the distribution was fair. Imagine mining in 2011, spending tens of dollars on very noisy CPU processing to get 50BTC. If you tried to sell it on the extremely nascent markets back then you took big risks and *maybe* got $500. You could just as easily get $50, or nothing, given insane volatility, and other risks.

Everyone thinks early participants were ultra lucky. The vast majority lost or sold their coins.

Do you know why there is a newspaper in the genesis block?

Finally, consider the alternatives. Fiat means total control in the hands of the elite that can print. This inevitably leads to a rentier class. Proof of stake tends to lead to a similar outcome long term, while it is at least algorithmic, it has "rentier" built in. Only in proof of work does *everyone* pay the market rate, in dollars or energy, *always*.

From this you can see that wealth concentration (which is extraordinarily difficult to measure, it does not correlate with addresses) at one moment is not the point, it's a question of fair market access to generating wealth. IMO bitcoin does this better.