You haven't written to the crashed drive yet have you?
No as I wasn't even able to mount it. And fsck is returning many errors. |
|
|
|
|
Oh my god this is the first time ever I have such a linux crash!!!
It seems that my system is absolutely unrecoverable!!!!!
I'm currently sending this message from a freshly installed Ubuntu distro. So far I've managed to recover some backups such as my GnuPG private key.
I hope I'll have no problem getting my wallet back!
Pray for me guys!
|
|
|
|
|
Il y a aussi l'idée que l'achat de bitcoin est un arbitrage économique. J'avais des euros et je les ai changés en bitcoins parce que je suis convaincu que bitcoin est une meilleure monnaie.
C'est une des règles économiques que le marché fait tendre les actifs vers leur véritable valeur, grâce à des agents qui achètent l'actif quand ils estiment qu'il est sous-évalué. Il n'y a rien d'injuste là dedans ou plutôt, pour paraphraser les propos d'Hayek, ça n'est pas important par rapport à ce que le marché apporte dans l'affaire: l'ajustement du signal prix par rapport à la demande et à l'offre.
|
|
|
|
Whoever gave me a -1 reputation....
thanks....
I'll wear it with honor...
hater...
This whole idea of a reputation system where people anonymously click on a +1 or a -1 button is just silly. |
|
|
|
Freedom of speech only means no law is allowed that would prevent people from expressing their opinions (afaik, ianal).
A Bitcoin transaction is nothing more than a expression of your view of who should be the new owner of your coins. Very true. +1 |
|
|
|
Par ailleurs, l'argent n'achète que ce qui est à vendre. Même avec 10 millions de bitcoins, je ne peux rien acheter à quelqu'un qui refusera de me donner ce qu'il possède. La valeur du bitcoin n'est déterminée que par des gens qui acceptent de leur plein gré de céder leur richesse contre des bitcoins. Donc pour moi cette histoire d'injustice est absurde, car avoir des bitcoins ne permet d'exproprier personne. D'ailleurs ceux qui trouvent que les bitcoins sont injustes ne les acceptent pas comme paiement, donc où est le problème ? Ils dénoncent une injustice dont ils ne sont même pas victimes. L'argent n'est qu'une représentation de la richesse réelle. Ce n'est pas parce que quelqu'un ne possède aucun signe monétaire qu'il est pauvre. Son patrimoine est constitué en général de plein d'autres choses: immobilier, parts d'entreprise, biens mobiliers, etc... En outre, avoir des bitcoins est inutile si on ne les utilise pas. Et pour les utiliser, il faut s'en séparer, et donc les faire circuler. Mais beaucoup plus généralement, ces considérations sur la justice et le mérite dans le marché me font penser à une question posée à Hayek sur le sujet dans un de ses entretiens TV: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dV7-2Aua4_4&t=3m27s |
|
|
|
Pour ma part je ne sais pas trop quoi penser de bitcoin.
Je ne sais pas si c'est une chose positive ou négative pour la civilisation.
Par contre, je me dis qu'une fois qu'on a inventé la chose… - je parle ici du principe de monnaie électronique décentralisée - il faudra faire avec.
Je ne sais pas non plus avec certitude si c'est une chose positive ou négative pour la civilisation, même si j'ai tout de même tendance à penser que c'est positif. Ce que je sais par contre, c'est que le droit d'échanger de façon volontaire une unité de compte contre des biens et services, ça relève de la liberté individuelle. Quelqu'un qui croit en la liberté économique ne peut pas s'opposer à bitcoin. Maintenant, il y aurait bien des choses à dire sur cet aspect soi-disant "injuste" de l'introduction des bitcoins. énormément à dire. Mais rien de tout cela n'a réellement d'importance par rapport à ce que je viens d'écrire plus haut. Je veux bien développer, mais à condition qu'on garde bien ça a l'esprit. |
|
|
|
|
For those who don't know, you can get to la Défense whether via subway line 1 or RER line 1, but I very much advise not to use RER. Use subway as it is faster, less crowdy and terminus is at la Défense, so you can't get it wrong.
|
|
|
|
I doubt Bitcoin will be made illegal. By itself, the Bitcoin network is just a mechanism for passing around signed messages and calculating hash values. It would be difficult to outlaw that without running into constitutional free speech issues. I think that's a bit too simplistic in today's world - "passing around (signed) messages" is basically the only thing the internet does, so if you see that protected by freedom of speech there would be no such thing as cybercrime, right? Execpt that here the message is nothing but an arithmetic transfer of some artificial amount. |
|
|
|
grondilu, "la Défense" on May 25th lunch sounds great....please post here when you have final cafe address since i won't have anyone's mobile number. cheers,
From what I see here we won't be too numerous so it will be easy to find a table pretty much anywhere. I'll PM my mobile number to everyone one day before so it will be easier to meet. |
|
|
|
just say "terrorism" or "child porn", and people will be ok with any constitutional right breach.
+1 I'm afraid you're right guys. I totally forgot about those magic words. |
|
|
|
An interesting legal idea here: I doubt Bitcoin will be made illegal. By itself, the Bitcoin network is just a mechanism for passing around signed messages and calculating hash values. It would be difficult to outlaw that without running into constitutional free speech issues.
I tend to agree with that. |
|
|
|
I was called by a person from Apple: App was rejected by Apple because "...it involves intermediate currency..."
I've asked why Apps such as PayPal and Venmo are accepted and he replied that he "does not have time to elaborate"
I then asked if they allow just a console to a remote node (not located on iPhone) and he said that this will also be an App that involves intermediate currency and there for will not be allowed...
Just throw you iCrap away.   |
|
|
|
Yes, no one is lending, yet. Bitcoin is still super young and we don't yet have all the needed mechanism in place in order to facilitate proper lending. But that's something I'm 100% confident will eventually happen if Bitcoin can maintain it's appeal.
Yep, I agree with you. I'm looking forward to seeing a peer to peer lending site. There is Ripple already. I meant a site where people can lend and borrow bitcoins - the bitcoin equivalent of the "Prosper" site. Well, you can do it on this very forum, don't you know? |
|
|
|
Yes, no one is lending, yet. Bitcoin is still super young and we don't yet have all the needed mechanism in place in order to facilitate proper lending. But that's something I'm 100% confident will eventually happen if Bitcoin can maintain it's appeal.
Yep, I agree with you. I'm looking forward to seeing a peer to peer lending site. There is Ripple already. |
|
|
|
|
Your drawing is very ugly, and I'm pretty sure you know that.
I'm glad I wrote my pledge would depend on the quality of the drawing.
Anyway, I'm sorry to acknowledge that you don't take this bounty seriously guys, so I have to lock this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
What about you just let people decide if they want to continue pricing their products in bitcoins or not ?
If the price of bitcoin is volatile in dollar, why should this mean that bitcoin's value is volatile, and not dollar ?
And even if bitcoin is volatile, there is nothing preventing a merchand to keep pricing in bitcoin anyway, thus improving bitcoin's stability.
For instance, I have been paying some hosting service 0.5 BTC a month. So far, the guy has never requested any change of price, despite a BTC/USD pair having been multiplied more than four times. And I don't mind continuing paying 0.5 BTC. The reason is just that to me the value of one bitcoin hasn't changed much, as my bitcoin stock hasn't changed much either.
Don't forget about the subjective value of a commodity. Market is not the absolute truth. Some economic agents may be irrationnal, but not all of them are.
|
|
|
|
@grondilo, ĉiu: Eble ni povus traduki la artikolon de satoŝi kune ĉe etherpad? Ĉu tiu interesus al vi?
etherpad? Tion mi ne konas. Certe mi felicxigxus pri traduko de cxi tiu artikulo, sed mi kredas ke ni povas fari tion en cxi tiu forumo. |
|
|
|
|
I've just realised the real meaning of the initial message. I get it, it's about demand for bitcoins as money, not about demand for an product priced in bitcoins.
I doubt this makes any sense, but it deservers a full, extensive answer. I'll write about it later.
|
|
|
|
His argument is that bitcoin will fail because it lacks a mechanism for dealing with demand, or "it lacks any mechanism for dealing with fluctuations in demand. Increasing demand for Bitcoin will cause prices in terms of Bitcoin to drop (deflation), while decreasing demand will cause them to rise (inflation)"
I'm sorry I'm not a professor of economics, but isn't that precisely what the law of offer and demand is about  Demand for something increases. As a result price increases. And people look at it and start to work on finding a way to answer this demand. High prices are an incentive for people to answer a demand. This is what price is about, damn it! I think it's called the "price signal" theory or something. Here is what I found on wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_signal, but I'm pretty sure there is a video of Walter Block somewhere, where he explains that extremely well. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
