Use a web wallet. Problem solved.
Not for web wallet. With exponentially growing blockchain size, it will become a problem for them very soon. Of course not: a web wallet would host only a *single* copy of the blockchain for all its users, not one for each of them. |
|
|
|
Tagging the thread for the lawls, and also, I found this rating on that BTC-OTC link that made me rofl...
"not a real pirate"
Orly...
lmao that was a gg |
|
|
|
You need to invest USD to get more usd by speculating with bitcoins.
What? |
|
|
|
|
In the "Your CDs" paragraph could you please add a "total"?
|
|
|
|
You can never loose it and nobody can confiscate from you.
You can loose it easily, and of course they can confiscate it "you stay in prison until you reveal the key" usually works. |
|
|
|
I'm having enough trouble trying to figure out what to do with the bitcoins I've got.
Invest them, to get even more bitcoins? |
|
|
|
After reading through this topic, I wonder if it is not possible for ASICMiner to sell subsidized ASIC mining devices that are firmware locked to mine 25% for ASICMiner and 75% for the buyer. This way hardware can be cheaper and ASICminer will not be tied to a centralized location. Better for the Bitcoin network, better for ASICMiner, and better for the miners (assuming the devices can be sold at at a 25%+ discount). Possible? While on first sight this appears like a clever idea, it actually can't work. If the goal is to be resilient if something happens to ASICminer, then the 25% would be lost anyway: nothing changed. |
|
|
|
Most/all banks and brokerage sites I know of do not require 2FA for their users. It is always optional.
Most/all banks I know have 8 character passwords, useless pins as a fake primitive 2FA, and many similar practices that would make any sane developer scream. Banks are not exactly a paragon of "doing it right". Actually they are one of the most prominent examples of "patch together some badly coded stuff, if anything breaks we don't really care". |
|
|
|
you might consider offering an SMS token as google does with gmail logins
While this is a good idea in general, keep in mind that recently weird things have happened. Until a reasonable explanation comes up for that, I wouldn't feel much safe with SMSs. |
|
|
|
Clearly a new solution for the security issues it required for mass adoption for laypeople - the hardware wallets, if they can be made very affordable, will certainly be a move in that direction.
Yeah, that would be great. You don't even need it to be a full featured wallet: as long as it's a "hardware containing private keys", that are used by a software, that would be a great first step. We already have this though. Cheap smartphones (either low-quality, or old-and-used.) Restrict it to wifi instead of getting a mobile plan, and only have 2 or so apps on it (a bitcoin wallet and a QR-code reader.) That seems like a good enough first step to me, at least. Good (and interesting) point. It's something that will require training, and effort, and continual practise in order to maintain.
a.k.a. "will likely be lost sooner or later". Bad idea. |
|
|
|
Curiously, for the first time since I've made this spreadsheet, the arbitrage on buying PURCHASE and selling MINING over buying directly SELLING is negative (i.e. it is more convenient to just buy SELLING). However this is not taking into account that buying PURCHASE increases a small bit the total assets, which is something you want if you plan to hold SELLING, right? |
|
|
|
But investors in S.MG (should) want whichever will give the best return on investment - the company's focus should NOT be on "what will make the most players happy" but on "what will make the most profit for our investors". And I'm VERY certain MP is on the side of investors not players.
None of which to say the two (pleasing investors and having satisifed players) are mutually exclusive - it's just that it's far easier to develop something that focuses on one of them than to try to deliver to both.
I disagree here. Even if investors care only about profits and not happy users, unhappy users will not bring profits in the long term, and likely not even in the short term (though that may happen). If your game is horrible it won't sell, no matter if it has a good business model (actually, having a bad game is a bad business model itself). Furthermore you'll alienate players for your future games. If instead your game is great but it doesn't have a sound business model, it may be a financial failure, but at least will give you a head start for your next one (assuming you manage to try to make one). So, both of these failures bring you no money, but while one gives you an advantage for an eventual next try, the other gives you a penalty! |
|
|
|
Anything thestringpuller has posted is pure gold, I've boomarked this page... thanks!! I don't have much to add to this thread because basically he has already said everything I would have and even more... and much much better than I would. Just pointing this out: I was under the impression that WoW has been hemorrhaging players for quite some time. They made a very dramatic shift from focusing on the early and middle progression of the game to the late game, and destroyed new player's experience of the early game entirely.
Not exactly. They started messing up when they decided to help unskilled players to compete in the endgame. Doing so actually degraded very much the endgame scene, which (as has already been said in this thread) was the main feature of WoW: skilled players got frustrated that the endgame was getting ruined and quit. Now, if skilled players quit, it doesn't matter how much you give free loot to unskilled players: if they have nobody to mentor them, they will fail. And they will complain. Hence, Blizzard dumbed down even more the endgame, making everything even worse... It's just that, everything else is at most a corollary. |
|
|
|
so maby sometime between 2035-2037 or so there will be no more coins to mine.
Transaction fees. |
|
|
|
Let's get this pony back on track with SPECULATION!
Someone give me a really good pseudo-economics reasoning (the more farcical the better) as to why we are experiencing a slight rally in the value of AM shares? Bonus points if your answer involves the rally in the price of BTC vs. fiat of the past few days.
Why we are experiencing a slight rally in the value of AM shares The reason for this is simple and BTC vs fiat is old news until next time. You have to concentrate on Tooth Fairy flight paths and not only on those strong winds in AM analysts digestive system. Rally spped per sq. m is closely related to the speed at which "investors" manage to pull numbers out of their collective arse while they evaluate and interpret imaginary live! reports. Truly amazing symbiosis of stupidity and ignorance. Combing 500 pages of meaningless drivel with Tooth Fairy flight path, technical analysis of 24 h average of AM price, multiplied by GDP sqr 1/3 and you have it - the answer is "yes". Who said anything about dwarves? I dare you! ..Loh |
|
|
|
US will stop bitcoins business at first(trying now), then EUROPE follows(trying now), then Russia and Asia(not happen yet). no exception, that's the end.
This is unsubstantiated FUD. |
|
|
|
I've spent a lot of time, invested a lot, will continue to invest a lot more, and have a long term plan of where I want this to go. Putting it out as open source to start with would leave eMunie and that goal open to being undermined by "script kiddies" that just rip it and copy/paste it and throw out their own. Wrong. As long as it's closed source it is by no way worth of any trust, hence nobody will use it, hence you will have wasted your time spent coding. Keeping it closed source will have exactly the effect you think it is preventing instead. Either you release the sources or don't bother releasing at all: it may or it may not be successful, but as long as it's closed, it's certain it won't be. |
|
|
|
Did the ripple people give a date for release of their code?
"as soon as we can"Somewhere else IIRC JoelKatz said he hoped to do that before the end of the year. |
|
|
|
There's nothing in the profile to see if someone is banned or not.
I know he's banned because I put the request in, and most bans are semi public in the staff forum.
This is... not brilliant, if I may. |
|
|
|
I am not so much interested in "rippled" but rather the open source for the whole system
my understanding is that rippled is just a particular interface, not the 'guts" of the system, if I grok it right.
As I understand, rippled is the only missing piece to the puzzle actually, the rest (the client) is already open source. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
