...Trust me...
If I trusted you, citing your sources would not be necessary. I do not trust you. an average merchant lost about .68 percent of annual income to fraud. A merchant has to pay around $3.08 on each dollar to replace the losses, penalties and chargeback fees.”
...
I'm going to stick with my 3% average annual loss to fraud number.
Fine, whatever. But In just the past 24hrs, ignoring my advice has cost you ~5%, or 2% more than CC fraud losses. Only because we had more good news. Time publishing now takes bitcoin too. Step 1, make bitcoin actually useful enough for normal people to bother obtaining, by making them be able to spend it on stuff. That will obviously drive down prices, since now early investors and hodlers can spend it on stuff. Step 2, now, is to get more normal people to adopt it. That's where merchant discounts (and currency controls by failing nations) come in. |
|
|
|
all capitalism is, is two people willing to trade resources [to possibly enrich themselves at the expense of others]
LOL! What? If I give you $40 for an old video card of yours, at who's expense is that trade made??? If you ask me to proofread a document of yours, and pay me $5 for my time, at who's expense is that trade made??? be those physical property, [which they don't really own]
Ok, then who owns it? Who owns the collection of comics, or art, or statues in my house? Who owns the bitcoins that I have the private key to? |
|
|
|
As I mentioned in this thread before, the idea of guaranteed minimum income depends entirely on the ability to confiscate income elsewhere, or print new money, which if bitcoin takes over will be made impossible. Perhaps in the future our society will change to believe that some humans have worth, and others are worthless, instead of the every life is worth the same idea we have now? That sounds like sarcasm. You don't have to evaluate people. You just need to respect their rights. That's all. Their rights to keep what they earn? Or their rights to take other people's personal stuff by force because they have a "right" to it? |
|
|
|
 Man, I feel really bad for Russian people right now  |
|
|
|
USA's list of countries in need of a colour revolution, countries that look out for their own interests is growing: Hungary, Finland, Tchekkia, Sebia, Austria, Turkey, China, India, Brazil...
Reading this as if it was coming from Russian "Pravda," as in "reading between the lines," does this mean that Russia is planning to invade Hungary, Finland, Tchekkia, Sebia, Austria, Turkey, China, India, and Brazil? |
|
|
|
I do not see how people have such a hard time comprehending the true nature of capitalism as that of violence, greed & war
Some people just have no idea what capitalism is, so they think it has something to do with violence, greed, and war. When actually, war is caused by governments, not capitalism, and all capitalism is, is two people willing to trade resources, be those physical property, labor, or intellect. That's all. Capitalism is competition and cooperation. Violence and war are the opposite of capitalism, perpetrated by governments and criminals. |
|
|
|
I offer the Nilson Report as source, you offer a blog post pimping a business by some Bitcoiner  I didn't even notice the thing about the author. Note I also provided a LexisNexis report, and the original source that I found this out from, the link I can't find anymore, was from Forbes, which I corroborated by checking other links at the time. Trust me, loss to credit card fraud is 3%, not 0.05% |
|
|
|
As I mentioned in this thread before, the idea of guaranteed minimum income depends entirely on the ability to confiscate income elsewhere, or print new money, which if bitcoin takes over will be made impossible. Perhaps in the future our society will change to believe that some humans have worth, and others are worthless, instead of the every life is worth the same idea we have now? |
|
|
|
Chances are that we will wipe and reset the score (star rating) when we switch, too, since, again, it doesn't really mean anything at this point.
Does that mean that every traders score will be reset? Just the star ratings, not the trading information. 1. Any chance you can lower the default tx fee to 0.00001 BTC per 1000 bytes? This has actually been the default fee setting in Bitcoin Core already since v0.9.
Already implemented in beta of version 2.1. Should have been released already, but we keep adding little tweaks that people have been requesting, which kept pushing it back due to extra testing. If you want to join beta and try out all the new features, go here https://plus.google.com/u/0/communities/102264813364583686576 Just make sure you have a backup of your keys before using it. We haven't had any issues with beta wallets screwing up balances (since we use testnet first), but just in case. It would be great if you can 1. push txs through port 80 as well (through external API sites, there's plenty available) if you're not doing so already, and 2. perhaps check if Mycelium has a working connection, and if not, warn the user "Your internet connection seems to be restricted, perhaps you need to login to your WiFi network?" This may avoid a lot of unnecessary confusion.
Since we use our own custom nodes, I think we use port 443 for connections, instead of the standard port 8333 that bitcoin nodes use. Since it's a custom node thing, I don't know if we would be able to push transactions to anywhere, but we'll look into it. As for internet connection, I think we already check for it when you try to sync your wallet balances, and it briefly pops up to let you know if your internet connection isn't working. What we REALLY need to do is implement BIP70 to be able to push signed transactions directly to the receiver, using either the internet, or other means like Bluetooth or NFC. But there are so many other things to add.... |
|
|
|
>The average annual loss to merchants from credit card theft is about 3%.
No. "During 2012 credit card and debit card gross fraud losses accounted for roughly 5.22₵ per $100 in total volume, up from 5.07₵ per $100 in 2011.
(Source: Nilson Report, August 2013)
"According to the Startup the average e-commerce retailer loses 3.1% to fraud every year." ( http://letstalkpayments.com/3-4-b-annual-fraud-losses-due-chargebacks-reversals-signifyd-can-help/) "LexisNexis published a survey according to which in 2013, an average merchant lost about .68 percent of annual income to fraud. A merchant has to pay around $3.08 on each dollar to replace the losses, penalties and chargeback fees.” ( http://www.forbes.com/sites/quickerbettertech/2014/09/22/why-the-home-depot-breach-is-worse-than-you-think/) I'm going to stick with my 3% average annual loss to fraud number. Meaning $360 a year, like I said, and not $6.26. >when I shop with bitcoin, I get discounts of 3%
No. You get a 3% discount from a limited list of retailers who accept cash through the payment processor you use.
They accept bitcoin. I don't care what they do with that bitcoin once they get it, and nor should I. Yes, the number of merchants who accept bitcoin right now is limited. So what? That number is growing, and I suspect so will the options where I can get discounts. Plus, despite that number of merchants being limited, I can buy literally everything I need with bitcoins, at that discount. You also do not get the buyer protection you [falsely] claimed costs me 3%.
(Source: fact)
Yes. Because I don't need it. There is no risk of my bitcoins being stolen from me using them to pay a merchant, unlike if I was using a credit card. So why do I need it? |
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I remember the bubbles too. The internet bubble, the housing bubble... It's sad that after these bubbles, things like internet and housing are completely worthless and don't exist any more.
Oh, wait.
|
|
|
|
You think we can have an economy where everything is free? haha. You're worse than the the worst of the pinkos. Depends on what you mean by everything and free.... i can see basic provisions being free in the not too distant future (100 years or whatever). Homeless people/diseased people/people committing petty crime are a pain in the ass for society & rich people cant exploit these types too easy. So... For someone who wants to live the life of a monk for example.. if basic life standards are supplied then they have everything they need/want. Supplied by whom? |
|
|
|
|
Belief is not faith. It's just something that someone believes is true based on what they know. So I wasn't implying religion.
Everybody believed the earth was flat at some point, because otherwise "things would fall off the bottom of it." I wasn't walking about recently.
"We" as in "the human race and all our combined knowledge."
We can't figure out why light is both a wave and a particle, but that doesn't matter, because light being able to travel like a particle makes aether not real. Or at least not necessary to exist for the rest of physics to work. Energy can travel without a need for some medium, like aether, to travel through.
Example is Tesla's famous giant free energy tower. That never worked, and theoretically has no reason to.
Light particle is not aether. It's a particle in a point in space, while aether was thought to be something that exists everywhere. In your analogy, aether would be the water, while light would be a wave in that water, where the wave needs the water to travel, but turns out light is like a thrown rock. Sure, it can travel through water, but it doesn't need it to be able to travel.
Scientists performed many experiments to detect aether, including testing for effects of earth moving through it. Theoretically there would be resistance in the direction we are traveling, and extra speed in the opposite direction where we are leaving aether behind. Nothing like that was detected, suggesting complete vacuum and lack of aether.
|
|
|
|
OK, looking back through the thread, I believe I know how to claim my prize now!! Please can the prize be sent to
1G6XYjh4gdDPKVtmfHYVg7jNJkQzzM9GHP
my old blockchain wallet where I sent the bitcoins from is no longer in use, and can't access it as it seems to be locked to my old IP address!
Boom! Transaction sent! https://blockchain.info/tx/ac9237722106bd17632b4105b043c9b1efd546f1154a8658fd2f627518279542Now everybody be impressed with me that I held a WHOLE $60 for a year and didn't run off to Mexico with it  |
|
|
|
Why would you accept the trade without even knowing who the other person is, or whether they intend to go through with it?
My very first step out of the gate, I get hit with this reputation penalty. Rather than accept responsibility for an obscure, tricky design, you blame the problem on me. Reputation penalty is for people who do something dishonest, or who inconvenience other users. I didn't scam or even cause the mildest of inconvenience to any user whomsoever. So I didn't deserve this penalty. The fault is yours, not mine. You should change the way Local Trader allocates penalties so this doesn't happen to anybody else; people to whom it has happened should have the undeserved penalty removed. The point of the penalty is so that if you discuss the trade, plan to meet, set up a time and place, accept the conditions of the trade, and then don't show up after all that, you get dinged. So don't accept any trades until you are sure that it will happen, and until you want to make sure that whoever you are trading with knows they will get penalized if they don't show up too. If someone contacts you, you don't hit accept trade, and then you or they cancel the order, it won't affect your reputation. Maybe that was lost in translation somewhere, since we kind of assumed that the trade simply showing up in your listing is enough to "accept" it the way you do, where you discuss it, and then actually accepting it is the pre-final step before you go out to meet each other. Maybe you could suggest how we can rename it? But in any case, this reputation hit is not a big deal at this point. It doesn't work right, people know it doesn't work right, and I haven't met anyone who actually pays attention to it. Plus, as I said, we WILL be changing the way reputation works in LocalTrader, mainly so that users can actually add reputation feedback themselves instead of it being automatic. Chances are that we will wipe and reset the score (star rating) when we switch, too, since, again, it doesn't really mean anything at this point. |
|
|
|
If you believe that bitcoin will survive and be widely adopted long term, why would you hold other currencies?
Because, in the offline world, a lot of merchants have not yet heard of Bitcoin. So, if I need to buy something from them, I need to have FIAT in possession. Sad, but true, the internet population is still less than the non-internet population across the globe. So convert only what you need to spend into fiat |
|
|
|
Rather than trying to prove something that is not provable, look at the various ideas. Various ideas for where the universe came from are?:
1. God;
2. Evolution;
Said another way: 1. Fairy tale with no actual proof 2. Observable reality We simply don't know where the universe comes from in all its complexity, simplicity, decline (entropy), and seeming ascent at times.
Again, you are arguing from ignorance. YOU don't know where the universe comes from. I and many others (especially astrophysicists) have a pretty good idea. What would you say if I were to claim "We simply don't know where computer software comes from in all its complexity, simplicity, etc., thus the obvious answer is that god wrote it all."  So far, because of our INability to understand all but a little, the best bet is "God," best by a long shot.
That's not a best bet, that's a good of holes. As we learn more and more, your best bet becomes smaller and smaller, and is continuously disproven. That's actually the WORST bet for your god, because such a bet means that god is proven wrong all the time. God moves the heavens? Proven wrong. God makes things fly? Proven wrong. God determines how species change? Proven wrong. God heals illnesses? Proven wrong. And this proving wrong of god and his actions will only continue. So your best bet is to actually get god out of the way of scientific progress before he is completely run over and crushed. It is even better than saying, Because we don't absolutely know for a fact, I'm simply going to ignore the whole topic.
But that is EXACTLY what you are saying when you claim that god is responsible! You take a complex topic, fail to explain it, and choose to simply ignore it, claiming that it must be god's doing. Scientists don't do that. They say "Because we don't absolutely know for a fact, we'll simply take our best guess, and keep studying until we know better." Or did I misunderstand you, and are you actually claiming that its better to simply ignore topics we don't understand? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
