|
why do we need business sponsorship of bitcoin when we are literally making money?
|
|
|
|
|
that sounds like it could be the basis of the feature, especially if something could be embedded into it to have it automatically transfer to another address after that block. because there is a danger in this though, isn't there, of losing the wallet.dat file in the meantime.
|
|
|
|
Tangible Cryptography isn't an exchange more like a Bitcoin broker but we haven't been hacked.
I guess we are just too quaint and low tech. You know 100% cold storage, batch processing of orders with manual verification, enterprise grade database with host based encryption, and GPG protected messaging. All that boring stuff.
I wonder if we should consider opening an exchange?
I don't know if there would be any interest in an exchange with 100% cold storage and delayed withdraws.
YES there absolutely would be. I would use it hands down over any other service. I would much rather know that all of my coins are safe and have delayed withdrawals than have instant withdrawals with the constant threat of a hack looming over me... +1 |
|
|
|
|
perhaps this is a way to deal with the tainted/stolen coin problem:
what if we could flag certain btc with something like "this cannot be transferred from this address within X period" (able to be changed by the owner)? for example, in a long-term savings situation, this would allow even an unprotected walled, assuming all coins were marked, to be safe for a period of time.
of course protecting the data relating to when it becomes un-protected would be important information for hackers to have to do time-based attacks/extractions on wallet files, so unless that is figured out maybe this is useless.
but, just thinking out loud...
|
|
|
|
|
yes i think the distinction needs to be made between already operating-for-profit companies and core bitcoin TEAM or related projects.
|
|
|
|
The point I clearly didn't make is that it's no surprise that Starbucks accepts things like Square because those are just improved technologies propping up the status quo.
Bitcoin is helping to build an entirely new economic model from the ground up.
Square plans to disrupt the retail payments market. Merchant acceptance is what will bring users onboard. There's no expensive infrastructue so merchants can adopt it with little risk. It's becoming a common strategy. Bitcoin will only ever be a niche currency until it's user-friendly - no matter how sound it is. It could be being used as a leap frog technology in developing nations right now if it wasn't so cumbersome. More user-friendly systems requiring only a smartphone already exist - Bitcoin needs to lift its game if it wants to compete in the payments market and not just be a speculative commodity until something shinier comes along. Bitcoin creditcards? Bitcoin wallets like Bitcoinspinner for Android, super easy to use webwallets like coinbase and mywallet at blockchain.info. Sending Bitcoins, via twitter, email, facebook... i shouldn't speak for him/her so much, i don't think that is what was meant exactly. we're just talking about the very first experience here. you download, you run, and what happens? how many people assume that it is broken or not working because of a simple thing like the app not explaining that the blockchain has to download first? |
|
|
|
I've said that I think the download-and-install-software-on-your-PC is a mostly-dead way of using software, and that the vast majority of people using Bitcoin in a year or three will be using it via a web application or on their smart phone. That's half of the reason why I don't think improving the UI is a high priority right now (the other half is because I think solving wallet security and backup issues is critical).
people have been saying that for years and years already. i hope it isn't true. I think Gavin's essentially right about the future of software but has over-estimated the time-frame. People want the same kind if usability on their smartphones and tablets that they have on their laptops and PCs but they want it now, not in 2 or 3 years. People don't their computing to be tied down by location any more than they want their telephony to require physical proximity. There may be congestion issues with mobile computing at the moment, but people are still abandoning fixed internet connections in favour of mobile broadband and phone and tablet computing in droves. All many people need to make the switch total is some killer apps, and that will happen sooner rather than later. i don't know. if what we're talking about is download-and-run vs download-and-run-in-browser, apple, google AND microsoft have shifted the game back to the latter, and it's probably going to stay that way for a good while. (although frankly given the increasing restrictions you can almost count the app stores as 'browsers') |
|
|
|
What would be cool is if mining pool's gives the option to miners to donate some funds to a shared developers bitcoin wallet.
Then at the end of each release, the funds inside that address will be automatically divided equally based on criteria possibly such as:
1) the number of commits
2) number of lines written
3) Im not sure if its possible to gauge the severity or importance of a fix.
those qualifiers are not good signs of quality or useful code. but what about the idea of bounties for features? actually i'm not a huge fan of that either, at least not by itself. i really think we should let the devs figure out how they want to break up the money. we just need to give it to them. |
|
|
|
I've said that I think the download-and-install-software-on-your-PC is a mostly-dead way of using software, and that the vast majority of people using Bitcoin in a year or three will be using it via a web application or on their smart phone. That's half of the reason why I don't think improving the UI is a high priority right now (the other half is because I think solving wallet security and backup issues is critical).
people have been saying that for years and years already. i hope it isn't true. |
|
|
|
It's a legitimate question. Square has attracted over $200 million dollars in venture capital in the two years since it was launched and is now being used at Starbucks. Dwolla has also attracted major investors and become a viable alternative to PayPal.
There are payment systems coming out right and left which are getting serious development funding and merchant adoption, yet there's really no serious money being directed towards solving the issues which create barriers to Bitcoin's acceptance as an alternative, mainstream payment method. People are expected to put time and effort into solving those issues out of idealism, which puts Bitcoin behind the other technologies which are targeting similar markets.
Bitcoin is not "user-friendly" for conventional business at the moment and it's not going to enjoy wide-spread adoption while it's cumbersome to acquire, to store, to spend or to exchange. It's not going to become user-friendly any time soon unless people are paid to develop solutions.
The reason Bitcoin is the future isn't because of its efficiency. Things like square are mere bandaids for a dying system. The reason Bitcoin will trump everything else is because it is a sound currency, unlike all things fiat. that has nothing to do with what he's talking about. |
|
|
|
|
wait, so what % of the total bitcoin has actually been stolen? :-)
|
|
|
|
|
oh my god we just figured out the announcement!
|
|
|
|
|
since you are one of the first traditional tech-angel-funded companies i've seen, was wondering if you can tell us about how you pitched your company and what was maybe different about that from traditional pitches (if anything).
i am also wondering if you said anything to your investors like:
"the value of BTC is increasing, we will give you dividends or exit options denominated in BTC" or "this is probably the only round we'll actually need because the value of BTC is increasing"
|
|
|
|
|
great style, but not enough red meat.
|
|
|
|
|
what is a dominance assurance?
|
|
|
|
|
or amazing times? anyway back to the point: let's SPECULATE on some dubious ideas that would generate similar controversial media chatter.
and i'm saying that because i don't have the first idea. come ye creative minds!
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
