So now they [perhaps PBOC & ors] are leaning on CNY exchange CEO's to not attend BTC conferences yet imply that BTC is to "small" for them to worry about....that's why PBOC may not communicate directly. Really Mr. Peking? http://www.coindesk.com/five-chinese-exchange-ceos-pull-out-conference/If this is true (and coinbase is the source, so their must be some suspicion), it is very interesting compared to the prior December statement that was jointly put out by PBOC & Friends. The Dec joint statement directly on BTC would appear to make BTC supra PBOC not infra. The "Friends" all stamped in, officially at the bottom, are likely having less than acrimonious discussions in the corridors of slightly less power than before right about now. Coupled with the number of times BTC was mentioned directly in the joint statement makes it hard to underplay now. If they do underplay they make themselves loose serious face by way of the prior statements. Consider the tittle of the release, [I rely on the translation] https://vip.btcchina.com/page/bocnotice2013 The People’s Bank of China and Five Associated Ministries Notice: “Prevention of Risks Associated with Bitcoin” it wasn’t not about Bitcoin further. Consider not 1, 2 or 3, but 5 whole ministries including the PBOC put their chocks on [the block] for this. Lets list them 中国人民银行 ......The People’s Bank of China 工业和信息化部 ...Ministry of Industry and Information Technology 银 监 会...........China Banking Regulatory Commission 证 监 会...........China Securities Regulatory Commission 保 监 会...........China Insurance Regulatory Commission It would be bard to put the word bitcoin more times into the joint statement if you tried. It is arguable now, the amount of press the December joint statement generated more importance to BTC than wished. The price drop caused by the joint statement announcement was essentially converted to a payment for the advertisement campaign to 1.3 Billion Chinese, by our good friends. But we need to cut them some slack. In the face of the financial and broader implications that BTC presented, which are to say the least "novel" one can understand the wisdom of the quick action taken by the Chinese Govt as they extrapolated the time frames within which they had to act. Lets put it this way: BTC was on the verge of a schwarzschild radius epicenter Peking, Ex nihilo. Think of all the carefully laid currency controls about to disappear, sucking RMB value out to who knows where. You can understand there must have been some headless chickens running around saying the sky is falling [For the status quo], sign this sign this. They were probably right…for them. The PBOC most of all faced questions about their raison d'etre. The mid term results of these actions are now presenting difficulty for several actors. The message this latest action sends again appears to be sub optimal. The Exchange CEO's not attending is more conspicuous by their joint absence at short notice. It is almost giving more importance to BTC than could otherwise be achieved. Yes it sends other messages to locals and the broader market "we are in control", but this message rings hollow. It was the fact that Winston could be seen in public with Julia that showed whom had won out. The problem for BTC is of course how do you send math’s to room 101. How do you revise that 2 + 2 = 4. Well you could, but you need to be in a different Universe…literally. The critical takeway from this is the novelty of BTC and the magnitude of the advance it has made over any preceding system makes it almost impossible to deal with by either conventional reasoning or tactics. There simply are no reference points, or historical precedents, reasoned theorists, or models to work from. While bitcoin maybe in beta, it turns out it has shown the structure/mechanics of society are also thrown into beta by the appearance of BTC. Further it seems the harder you squeeze BTC at one point it just thrives at another point. One example of this is the inchoate promise BTC makes to state actors that pen more friendly BTC regulation will attract capital, business and brains....in orders undreamt of. I wonder if our [usually] enlightened friends have parallels to the Boy who cried wolf, what happens when you cut of the head of the Hydra, Prometheus and certain burned texts. It's probably high time a few think tanks actually sat down and made some reasoned decisions...there a a few obvious ones even if no comrade in the room want to put their hand up and say it. Right now they are starting to make Karples look organized. One wonders if they had expected just the joint statement to implode BTC for good. What actually happened is China and PBOC found themselves increasingly relegated to a blip on a log graph, joining the large cohort of learned doomsayers. Who knew you could Soft Hash to secure the blockchain and PBOC would be leading the way. P.S. dear Translator & Official I hope you enjoyed translating/reading this. |
|
|
|
|
BitCoin, be your own bank, Today
|
|
|
|
A system is set up, value is promised, where was any value promised by anyone to anyone.....? |
|
|
|
More and more, Bitcoin looks like a Pink Sheet stock. Trading continues, even though there's no asset value behind it.
The fundamental problem with Bitcoin is that unidirectional money transfers to remote anonymous parties are the con man's dream. Most "Bitcoin enterpreneurs" seem to be con men. Over half the Bitcoin exchanges have gone bust, even though that should be a low-risk business. Most of the sellers of mining hardware seem to be unable to reliably make, sell, and deliver ordered hardware. The "Bitcoin stock markets" are a joke, and the "Bitcoin Ponzis" are just embarassing.
Bitcoin has become the clown car of money because of all this.
The underlying technology isn't bad. We're about 2/3 of the way there to something that might work. The first generation of crypto-currency was Chaum's DigiCash in the early 1990s. This had protection against double-spending, like Bitcoin, but it relied on a centralized ledger system. Bitcoin is basically DigiCash with a distributed ledger, the block chain. DigiCash failed because of Cham's differences with his backers, and because it was too early.
With Bitcoin, you still have to trust the receiving party when you order something. From recent experience, that doesn't work. The protocol could in theory be extended to support escrow and arbitration, but it hasn't been. That's the remaining 1/3 of the problem.
What we have now is too slimeball-friendly.
pretty good analysis to some extent, but there is huge value behind btc. It can replace 50% of all banking infrastructure, That's worth a trillion or so per year. |
|
|
|
try to explain it to a legit charity that does not care about privacy at all.
example: donation address to seans outpost
he does not care about privacy AT ALL infact he wants the world to know and use that address for donations, and he 'spends' the inputs manytimes a month. explain the risk and/or chance all their donations can be lost by using the same address.
(without meandering into a privacy concern)
well no he can keep clearing that address. |
|
|
|
|
I like satoshis
but bits is a pretty good idea
it flows with Bitcoin, you buy Bits.....
so wont jar main stream.
either that or use some outrageous name like...."jams" or "jjs"
|
|
|
|
|
I do note though the mining tax, must act as a drag on BTC vs say a BTC with a POS system that was just as safe/secure same distribution.
Thus a POS would out compete a POW on those terms.
|
|
|
|
Rand Paul has proven to be really intelligent, so he will catch up.
When enough people kept asking him about Bitcoin, eventually he was bound to answer.
Over time he will learn all about it.
Yes. And I think over time many people will begin to catch up. I was having beers with my dad a few nights ago (who's held bitcoin for a while now) and he was asking about why they have value and why they are scarce. Trying to explain it really made me realize how foreign and mind-bending the concept is. I was explaining how bitcoins are very difficult to find. That right now bitcoin miners across the word are testing 60 quadrillion numbers every single second looking for that special number that will generate the next bitcoin in the chain. I could see that he would sort of "get it" for a few seconds--how difficulty adjusts automatically, how this keeps the inflation rate known, and how this creates the situation where producing a new bitcoin costs an amount roughly equal to its value at the time. But he kept saying "that really makes my mind bend" and he is right. Bitcoin is unlike anything else. It is our first scarce digital asset and anyone can find them--you just need that magic nonce. one of the reasons its mind bending, is that the education of fiat has value has been around for many generations. most people can't conceive this is possible without a state issuer. Every advert, job, house, purchase, even self worth to some extent has been measured in USD or other currency. They now are faced with the prospect that's not true....in a big way....consider BTC has evaluated between 500,000 x to 1000,000 times since its launch vs the USD. It puts the question irrefutably on the table. That 50,000,000 ~ 100,000,000%. I'm not sure there has be any such rise of anything in recorded history, perhaps commodities vs the Riechmark in the 1920's |
|
|
|
A script to do this or even manually would be trivial.
100% death of anything related to MaidSafe. why? |
|
|
|
answer: none
if a certain mining script was any better then the other due to efficiency, then giv it enough time and greedy miners will pile on so many rigs to get the biggest slice of the reward pie. and others will do the same to compete until its no longer efficient.
no matter what th 'puzzle' is to get a reward, people will buy as much equipment as they can to compete. so changing bitcoin with an aim of efficiency is only going to last a few weeks before the competition meets or exceeds the old mining protocols.
so the big picture is that it wont change a thing
uhhh, you don't buy mining hardware for pos |
|
|
|
Fools and their money. Was this information not available to you prior to your BTC donation? Failing at math is not an IPO director's problem..
It's yours.
Sorry about your luck.
I did not invest that much so my lucks fine and the current MS exchange rate is about the same for what you invested anyway. No this info was not clearly articulated at the IPO, nor was the speed of transition from MSC or BTC equal. The MSC people reconised the disparity themselves. That's irrelevant anyway. What is relevant, is that I want Maidsafe to succeed, and this is a path to do that. |
|
|
|
The undisputed fact is that MAIDSAFE MADE a huge error, intentionally or otherwise with the IPO. They put and inflated rate on MSC, of 2.5 to 1 BTC vs market BTC rate.  If the figure in the image is correct, being 2.5 x , then 1.5 parts of 2.5 parts would be returned thus if you paid up 1BTC then 1.5/2.5 x 1 should be returned. However BTC offers something unique. A way to make this right a % of BTC back to the BTC addresses to make equal to MSC. Lets see how legit they are.[/b] A script to do this or even manually would be trivial. This has tarnished and otherwise potentially great product, at its base. We will call this Proof of Legitimacy. POL.We have in BTC a mechanism that is open, and relatively easy to do so that all IPO people in BTC can be put back to actual MSC / BTC rate. MS even have the list of all BTC addresses. MS have the BTC. This would probably set MS apart from all other IPO's, in the world, ever, and set a precedent of all IPO in crypto in the future. It would set the bar. It would also make MS be legit, and avoid endless scam at it's genesis, that has dogged NXT and others. What will MS's IPO POL be, -250% or 100%, its not like they can't do this thing. It not up for debate maid safe admit they were is error. The ball is now in their court and you can vote here to make your voice known. |
|
|
|
Compairing the price paid by BTC and MSC Backers of Maidsafe IPO I find Out this: I think MaidSafe team should take action and Pay to BTC Backers more Bonus to cover this unfair IPO, Period. so the only way now for MS to fix this is give away enough MS to make this equal, else its probably not going to float well. They need to desam and fast.
One way would be to send a % of BTC back to the BTC addresses to make equal to MSC. Lets see how legit they are.This would likely raise the MS value by quite a lot and thus help the whole project I'm a big supporter of what maidsafe hopes to achieve, but this fiasco has unfairly punished a large majority of people that have put their trust and faith in this team and this project. Something needs to be done to compensate the BTC investors and level the playing field. You can't have an IPO and unfairly reward one half of investors arbitrarily. This is not the way you do business. I suggest we start a petition, If everyone who invested via BTC signs it I think they will have no choice but to take it seriously. so lets do this
One way would be to send a % of BTC back to the BTC addresses to make equal to MSC. Lets see how legit they are.We will call this Proof of Legitimacy. POL.Crypto are unique in that we have a mechanism that is open, and relatively easy to do so that all IPO people in BTC can be put back to actual MSC / BTC rate. MS even have the list of all BTC addresses. This would probably set MS apart from all other IPO's, in the world, ever, and set a precedent of all IPO in crypto in the future. It would set the bar. It would also make MS be legit, and avoid endless scam at ts genesis. What will MS's IPO POL be, 0 or 100%, its not like they cant do this thing. They admit they were is error. Very good Terminology. I think that currently Maidsafe's Proof of Legitimacy is below %50 but if they Bonus the BTC Holders some MS's to cover their Losses this will increase Their Proof of Legitimacy even above %100. You say %120! Because everyone may make mistakes, But the one who cover his mistake and pay for it to avoid others to lose, is more trustable and generate more confident and trust to his audiences than the person that make no mistakes yet! I hope they take this thread serious otherwise they always should carry the POL of %50 with their coins! if the figure is correct, being 2.5 x , then 1.5 parts of 2.5 parts would be returned thus if you paid up 1BTC then 1.5/2.5 x 1 should be returned. A script to do this or even manually would be trivial. |
|
|
|
Compairing the price paid by BTC and MSC Backers of Maidsafe IPO I find Out this: I think MaidSafe team should take action and Pay to BTC Backers more Bonus to cover this unfair IPO, Period. so the only way now for MS to fix this is give away enough MS to make this equal, else its probably not going to float well. They need to desam and fast.
One way would be to send a % of BTC back to the BTC addresses to make equal to MSC. Lets see how legit they are.This would likely raise the MS value by quite a lot and thus help the whole project I'm a big supporter of what maidsafe hopes to achieve, but this fiasco has unfairly punished a large majority of people that have put their trust and faith in this team and this project. Something needs to be done to compensate the BTC investors and level the playing field. You can't have an IPO and unfairly reward one half of investors arbitrarily. This is not the way you do business. I suggest we start a petition, If everyone who invested via BTC signs it I think they will have no choice but to take it seriously. so lets do this
One way would be to send a % of BTC back to the BTC addresses to make equal to MSC. Lets see how legit they are.We will call this Proof of Legitimacy. POL.Crypto are unique in that we have a mechanism that is open, and relatively easy to do so that all IPO people in BTC can be put back to actual MSC / BTC rate. MS even have the list of all BTC addresses. This would probably set MS apart from all other IPO's, in the world, ever, and set a precedent of all IPO in crypto in the future. It would set the bar. It would also make MS be legit, and avoid endless scam at ts genesis. What will MS's IPO POL be, 0 or 100%, its not like they cant do this thing. They admit they were is error. |
|
|
|
|
I support pos/pow PeerCoin,
but am hesitant to suggest a fork, why, well we already have other models doing othey types of coins, why change btc, it would lose diversity.
make your own coin,
or as suggeted elsewhere, make a coin that credits all existing BTC addresses with the same percentages of your new coind and there you have the existing user base of BTC psuedo~forked
end of.
|
|
|
|
This encryption feature should be removed from all software until the bugs are worked out. I created a set of wallets with an easy to remember password in January 2014 and now it doesn't work. I tested the password to decrypt one of the wallets before loading them. Now I cannot recover them. I have a feeling this will be a problem for a lot of people that think their BIP 038 wallets are secure.
Edit:
Win7
Either Chrome, Mozilla, or Explorer (can't recall which I used) but probably Chrome
It was Bitaddress.org saved to my drive either v2.8.1 or 2.5.1 but probably the newer
I didn't write down the exact PW, but wrote down a hint to it.
I hope this isn't a bug and is merely human error. It will be much easier to fix that way.
always make sure you have actual private keys and test them. |
|
|
|
Owning berkshire means owning a slice of a huge conglomerate of profitable, growing businesses. Owning bitcoin means owning an electronic numerical value that's guaranteed by the network.
Berkshire is a productive asset, bitcoin is effectively an e-commodity. There is virtually no intrinsic value in bitcoin (it doesn't generate massive amounts of value for society). Owning berkshire for long periods of time is investing (long-term profit and value growth), while owning bitcoin for long periods of time is speculating (believing the next sucker will buy a non-productive asset at a higher price than you).
Bitcoin has massive intrinsic value. Eg replaces 1/2 of the world banking infrastructure for one. |
|
|
|
moneys not in retail. Ebay/Amazon, would not benefit BTC much inmho
It wouldn't benefit BTC? Are you nuts? Bitcoin is a currency, what good is it if we can't even buy things at two of the largest online retailers? retail, is a small part of the economy, ebay and amazon sell alot of plascraptic deprecating assets. Real money is in financial instruments, forex, appreciating assets etc. what does anyone even buy from ebay/amazon that is so essential? Forex in one day is near 3 Trillion. That's more than ebay+amazon+ whoever else you want to put in, in a day. ebay is worth what...6000 houses in a decent metro area, soo can house 18000 - 24000 people. That's not that much. It has nothing to do with the value of Ebay or any other retail company. It has nothing to do with how much money is in the retail industry. We are trying to create a decentralized CURRENCY. What is the number one thing we use currency for? To BUY things...Nobody will take Bitcoin seriously until every day online activities are seamless with bitcoin. That means retail purchases. btc is a currencyfor purchaseing, but that's not it's only function, nor its main function. The store of wealth and large wealth transfer are by far more important to BTC value, as well as volume fiat in an out of BTC at will. amazon + ebay will quickly use btc when these are large enough |
|
|
|
satoshis seriously! people are already using satoshis, lets go straight to that, its pretty common now, Doge User base is completely familiar with satoshis as is all of the alts. That's massive. Satoshis now, why? - it differentiates
- cements the BTC history in,
- set BTC as the bar, that is already defacto.
- works nicely to 1satoshi = 1 cent
- feels good to own 10K satoshi
- will put pressure to make x-actions costs cheaper, improving comparative advantage
- end of ubtc and mbtc threads
- already so common people say sats
- moon 2, etc
- adoption hyperspace
- ?.?.?.?.?
- Profit
saves this argument at mbit , ubit etc. which will just cycle back as mbit become to big
|
|
|
|
I agree. The psychologic effect of having full or more is better than having fractions, whole numbers + small fractions are easier to read than tiny fractions like 0,004546, and if btc skyrockets to 10000+, the trasaction costs will start to become significative
which will force transaction costs down, and make btc even more compedative |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
