Haven't followed it up, where can I find more?(checked the LTC forum and saw nothing)
find warren on this forum or the ltc forum. he has some google blog thing. anyway the development collected a shit load of money, like $500,000 or so and the path has been split from just following btc. LTC is its own beast now. Thanks, thought it was that Warren guy. Btw you should really check out the LTC daily volume on this particular Chinese exchange https://www.okcoin.com/ , LOL |
|
|
|
That's indeed it. But I mostly talked with respect to the problem/non-problem that is Bitcoin's infrastructural suitability as a currency(stuff like 1MB block and confirmation time, etc)
ahh got ya, but there is other crypto for that like LTC. LTC made trade-offs for its faster confirmations, you should read fanquake(a LTC developer) 's take on this: http://archive.is/XXBn , I am hopeful of LTC's future mostly because the developers are honest and want to push things forward, rather than pretending everything is fine, typical trait among creators of scamcoins  that is dated and the new direction was changed with the new team that came about in the spring of 2013. Haven't followed it up, where can I find more?(checked the LTC forum and saw nothing) |
|
|
|
That's indeed it. But I mostly talked with respect to the problem/non-problem that is Bitcoin's infrastructural suitability as a currency(stuff like 1MB block and confirmation time, etc)
ahh got ya, but there is other crypto for that like LTC. LTC made trade-offs for its faster confirmations, you should read fanquake(a LTC developer) 's take on this: http://archive.is/XXBn , I am hopeful of LTC's future mostly because the developers are honest and want to push things forward, rather than pretending everything is fine, typical trait among creators of scamcoins |
|
|
|
ATM we will mainly use it that way, a contender of gold's position.
Well "someone" just hours ago bought a brand new Lambo with BTC. So was BTC a currency there or a store of value? The important thing is actually Bitcoin "can" be used as a currency, it doesn't have to be practical to use it, just the potential is enough. Much like an opposition party which gets votes but never enough to get elected can put the ruling party's power in check. Then people have to spend bitcoins once in a while to send those in charge a message, however inconvenient such spending may be. Gold had such power, but after USG managed to wrestle control of the majority of gold reserve within the U.S it is no more, and gold is confiscatable. In this case it was very practical, e-mail plus BTC = new lambo in my drive way in a few days. I never even had to leave the basement. To me BTC can be a good store of value but it is really a currency. We are in this interesting scenario mostly due to banks' slowpokish dinosaur reaction to Bitcoin. They throttle the flow of fiats in/out of the market, so nobody can practically "cash out" and get his newly earned fiats into any other payment system to pay for the luxury goods they want to buy. But Bitcoin will find a way to get in and kick their asses, so the merchants are there to help you to move the money  on silk road btc was a currency eh? sure to speculators btc is a store or wealth, but not to them druggies who only cared about getting that smack or whatever its called. That's indeed it. But I mostly talked with respect to the problem/non-problem that is Bitcoin's infrastructural suitability as a currency(stuff like 1MB block and confirmation time, etc) |
|
|
|
ATM we will mainly use it that way, a contender of gold's position.
Well "someone" just hours ago bought a brand new Lambo with BTC. So was BTC a currency there or a store of value? The important thing is actually Bitcoin "can" be used as a currency, it doesn't have to be practical to use it, just the potential is enough. Much like an opposition party which gets votes but never enough to get elected can put the ruling party's power in check. Then people have to spend bitcoins once in a while to send those in charge a message, however inconvenient such spending may be. Gold had such power, but after USG managed to wrestle control of the majority of gold reserve within the U.S it is no more, and gold is confiscatable. In this case it was very practical, e-mail plus BTC = new lambo in my drive way in a few days. I never even had to leave the basement. To me BTC can be a good store of value but it is really a currency. We are in this interesting scenario mostly due to banks' slowpokish dinosaur reaction to Bitcoin. They throttle the flow of fiats in/out of the market, so nobody can practically "cash out" and get his newly earned fiats into any other payment system to pay for the luxury goods they want to buy. But Bitcoin will find a way to get in and kick their asses, so the merchants are there to help you to move the money |
|
|
|
ATM we will mainly use it that way, a contender of gold's position.
Well "someone" just hours ago bought a brand new Lambo with BTC. So was BTC a currency there or a store of value? The important thing is actually Bitcoin "can" be used as a currency, it doesn't have to be practical to use it, just the potential is enough. Much like an opposition party which gets votes but never enough to get elected can put the ruling party's power in check. Then people have to spend bitcoins once in a while to send those in charge a message, however inconvenient such spending may be. Gold had such power, but after USG managed to wrestle control of the majority of gold reserve within the U.S it is no more, and gold is confiscable. |
|
|
|
We need to realize that at a very basic level Apple’s business model for IOS is fundamentally incompatible with Bitcoin. Let us not forget that the entire security model of Bitcoin is based on a decentralized network. A critical part of the security model for Bitcoin is that end users have full control over their computing devices. If one gives this control to a centralized "authority" namely Apple by the means of DRM then this defeats the entire security model of Bitcoin.
If the above is not a good enough reason one must also keep in mind that radical disruptive innovation will never take place on a platform where one has to get permission from the status quo in order to innovate.
The best solution is for the widespread adoption of Bitcoin to drive Apple with their DRM infected and censorship ridden IOS business model (which by the way is straight out of George Orwell's 1984) into bankruptcy.
When it comes to cryptography and security iOS did so much better than Android, I want to trust Android with my mobile wallet, I simply can't. |
|
|
|
Lol who buys Bitcoins from ebay?  There are so many artists stiiting there with their baits. Once a friend of mine order a power supply unit from ebay and all he got was a metal case filled with sand!  lol. That sums eBay up. Did he send the sand back? That actually sums up the chargeback system so many people bashing Bitcoin for not having, it's a unfair system protects neither the buyer nor the seller. |
|
|
|
Finally a person who thinks like me. I hope that Bitcoin just stays this way. It's value would be huge and the risk would be limited. Trying to move forward into the 'exchange currency' world is very risky given the scaling, key security, latency, and privacy issues among others. Focusing on the 'store of value' aspect would be much less risky, and given the 'mindshare' and development state as I write this, it has a decent likelihood of being stressful. but really it can be used as both, so it will. im happy however with people using it for whatever they want. more demand means price up no matter what. ATM we will mainly use it that way, a contender of gold's position. But as I said elsewhere in this thread, it will take 500 years for us to fully appreciate what Bitcoin has given us-if human beings are to colonize multiple planets one day, it would be ridiculous for them to still expect authority from a few individual politicans, election and democracy themselves would also not seems to make much sense without shared local political interest, authorities have to be derived from some means which are human-independent, for which Bitcoin sets a precedence. |
|
|
|
|
His point of view is interesting, especially the part about how Bitcoin is a store of value not necessarily because of the rampant speculation ,but its power to balance the fiat flood created by the governments.
|
|
|
|
Yeah, it's your patent, now sue us, sue all the miners, let's see if you can take them all down!
Not as simple as you think. They'll sue the exchanges and main websites. No one is stupid enough to sue individual miners. Life will be hard without the exchanges and other services. I pity those who live within the full protection of IP laws yet without access to a proper escrowing payment system. |
|
|
|
|
Yeah, it's your patent, now sue us, sue all the miners, let's see if you can take them all down!
|
|
|
|
|
Fact of life: for those who can't make proper use of money, even if you give them your money for free, they'll still eventually lose it to others who can make better use of it.
|
|
|
|
Yup, something I forgot to add: Chinese government hardly ever release a statement without adding all kinds of rhetorics and political indoctrination into it, now this statement is surprisingly free of that-had the government wanted to put a stop on Bitcoin trading, they would have painted it in much more negative ways, instead they merely warn of risks, but to the Chinese mindset, "government says it's risky=I can make big money", and "I can make big money"+"government says I am free to do so"="BUY BUY BUY!" |
|
|
|
|
Vitalik is as good as ever.
|
|
|
|
I agree with this theory, that Nick Szabo is Satoshi.
To me, the biggest piece of evidence that very few people discuss, is the fact that Nick Szabo attempted to post-date his "bit gold" post from 2005 to 2009, after the release of Bitcoin.
That's funny. So the witch hunt continues. Anyway Nick Szabo created the "bitgold" after getting inspiration from Wei Dai (who in 1998 created the digital currency b-money). And Dai was inspired by David Chaum, who first proposed cryptographic system for untraceable payments in 1982. The list will go on and on....... But why would Nick Szabo suddenly attempt to post-date his "bit gold" post, literraly 2 months after the Bitcoin whitepaper was published? Also, the design of bit gold is a lot closer to bitcoin, than b-money or what Chaum worked on. But why would Satoshi, who was so thorough in hiding his trails, settle with the name 'Bitcoin', despite its apparent similarity to ' bit gold'? If he was familiar with Szabo's work he should not have overlooked this, especially he should not on one hand coin such a name, and on the other hand pretend to have no knowledge of Szabo's work. Your looking at it from the wrong perspective, Satoshi doesn't have to care, he is MIA. If Szabo would be Satoshi... now then you're looking at a whole bunch of dead give-aways. Similarity in name, Similarity in design, same time frame. The logical assuming to make though (most likely scenario) is that Satoshi read about Szabo's work, and got inspired by it. Then all of a sudden some of Satoshi's earlier comments would also make more sense. "I'm better with code than with words. Until I knew I could figure out all the code problems, I wasn't sure to post." *note paraphrasing here, can't be bothered to look up the exact wording. And all of a sudden, the picture of Satoshi becomes much different. He doesn't have to have the economics, he doesn't have to have the math. (All that stuff was done by Szabo) All that is needed it a brilliant computer programmer, who understand crypto (which just means that he had to have been doing some work on program / communication security) and has a liberal mindset. Only one problem, this would put Satoshi from a candidate range of a hundred into a range of thousands if not ten thousands. Satoshi improved Szabo's math, so he indeed needs to have the math. In fact he made a number of decisions when examined retrospectively revealing very profound, perhaps above public knowledge understanding of cryptography, hashed address being one example, secp256k1 in place of secp256r1 being another. That being said, I believe it was indeed common sense within a small circle about what economic characteristics maybe desirable in such a currency, just the implementation details are lacking. Also, the psychological implications of mining for speculators maybe his unique insight or unintended consequences, we may never know. Intelligence and knowledge being one thing, the determination to go at it alone for many years being another, also, the self-restraint to not premine, the openness and communication skills to build a society around you, the friendliness he displayed when interacting with people, and the grace to exit and vanish are all characters you can't find on everyone, some of which are important to get Bitcoin kick-started in the first place. |
|
|
|
I agree with this theory, that Nick Szabo is Satoshi.
To me, the biggest piece of evidence that very few people discuss, is the fact that Nick Szabo attempted to post-date his "bit gold" post from 2005 to 2009, after the release of Bitcoin.
That's funny. So the witch hunt continues. Anyway Nick Szabo created the "bitgold" after getting inspiration from Wei Dai (who in 1998 created the digital currency b-money). And Dai was inspired by David Chaum, who first proposed cryptographic system for untraceable payments in 1982. The list will go on and on....... But why would Nick Szabo suddenly attempt to post-date his "bit gold" post, literraly 2 months after the Bitcoin whitepaper was published? Also, the design of bit gold is a lot closer to bitcoin, than b-money or what Chaum worked on. But why would Satoshi, who was so thorough in hiding his trails, settle with the name 'Bitcoin', despite its apparent similarity to ' bit gold'? If he was familiar with Szabo's work he should not have overlooked this, especially he should not on one hand coin such a name, and on the other hand pretend to have no knowledge of Szabo's work. |
|
|
|
Banks are chomping at that bit to get involved in bitcoin and cryptocurrencies but keeping getting sternly warned off by the facists in govt ... who see their dreams of totalitarian financial information awareness and control disappearing overnight ... at some point the leash will break and money, real big money, will be set free ... and the facists will be washed away in the flood of capital racing through every nook and cranny they have blocked up with their byzantine attempts to control liquidity to their own selfish, misguided ends.
An old fashioned Jubilee of Jubilees (500 year cycle) is approaching ... pity the idiots who willfully stand in its way full of hubris and ignorance in equal measure.
We may need another jubilee of jubilees to see the full value of Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
The article is not so bad. I mean clearly the writer doesn't believe in bitcoin but it's an article focuses on volatility and volatility is a fact in bitcoin.
Apart from the title everything else is fine with me.
anybody who gets into bitcoin thinking that there won't be volatility is just a fool. im pretty sure most people who bought in felt this way at least. i just think the writer is doing this premature "i told you so" .. well, my response is "no shit, bitcoin is a volatile currency/asset." Actually he is just stressing out volatility and he even says that the price might return soon to pre crash levels. Pretty descent article from someone that obviously thinks of bitcoin as something that it's not going to happen. More like the volatility of fiats is now being measured against a fixed unit then the volatility of Bitcoin itself. |
|
|
|
|
To say Jed is a Satoshi is an insult to Satoshi I guess. That guy went on to work on Ripple, I can't believe Satoshi would like an idea like that.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
