|
Come to btc-e and trade some altcoins, there is always some pump&dump going in at least one of them.
|
|
|
|
The bitcoin ATM seems neat but whatever happened to the bitcoin debit card?!
You are not supposed to mention that here. |
|
|
|
Any predictions?
Prices will rise, not fall. Read more posts of rpietila. haha nice.  |
|
|
|
Well it's not my mother-tongue.
What was your first? German |
|
|
|
i guess im just not all that bright then, i hope that you will be patient with me. i dont understand how that answered my question. unless you mean to say that you dont believe in the consept of property in general?
You are close. The concept of property is inherently tied to the application of force, or if you will lack thereof when one instance has been accepted. Application =/= initiation That's what fighting kids say too once you stop them. Let me make it simple for you, with a concept as old as Rome: Vim Vi Repellere Licet Yeah that makes it sound more romantic.  |
|
|
|
i guess im just not all that bright then, i hope that you will be patient with me. i dont understand how that answered my question. unless you mean to say that you dont believe in the consept of property in general?
You are close. The concept of property is inherently tied to the application of force, or if you will lack thereof when one instance has been accepted. Application =/= initiation That's what fighting kids say too once you stop them. |
|
|
|
i guess im just not all that bright then, i hope that you will be patient with me. i dont understand how that answered my question. unless you mean to say that you dont believe in the consept of property in general?
You are close. The concept of property is inherently tied to the application of force, or if you will lack thereof when one instance has been accepted. I think your English broke. "or if you will lack thereof when one instance has been accepted."  Well it's not my mother-tongue. |
|
|
|
i guess im just not all that bright then, i hope that you will be patient with me. i dont understand how that answered my question. unless you mean to say that you dont believe in the consept of property in general?
You are close. The concept of property is inherently tied to the application of force, or if you will lack thereof when one instance has been accepted. This is what you call power, the potential application of force. |
|
|
|
So you believe that a society that was predicated on the most fundamental notion of libertarianism which is that the initiation of violence is unacceptable would be a particularly violent place? that's like saying that you expect commune X to be one of the highest consumer of beef per capita in the world because its comprised entirely of vegans.
I just think that the rigid definitions of ownership and social contracts will get in the way. Any squatter knows more about ant-authoritarianism than you guys. Which one of our two principals do you dislike? the method for original appropriation which is homesteading or the method of transfer which is voluntary exchange? I just told you. |
|
|
|
So you believe that a society that was predicated on the most fundamental notion of libertarianism which is that the initiation of violence is unacceptable would be a particularly violent place? that's like saying that you expect commune X to be one of the highest consumer of beef per capita in the world because its comprised entirely of vegans.
I just think that the rigid definitions of ownership and social contracts will get in the way. Any squatter knows more about ant-authoritarianism than you guys. |
|
|
|
I support the idea of libertarians moving somewhere remotely. Especially if it is so remote that I will never be there.  I very strongly respect your right to get to gather with other authoritarians to create your hierarchical authoritarian paradise. I'm very glad to hear that you extend a very similar respect to me! So everybody is happy.  FYI: This is actually called pogo anarchism. No, not quite. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_Pogo_Party_of_GermanyNot really at all, in fact. You haven't visited their site it's much more accessible in German though. As for Libertopia that would be quite close to the "Gewalt Erlebnis-Park" (violence theme park) as I can practically imagine.  |
|
|
|
I support the idea of libertarians moving somewhere remotely. Especially if it is so remote that I will never be there. I very strongly respect your right to get to gather with other authoritarians to create your hierarchical authoritarian paradise. I'm very glad to hear that you extend a very similar respect to me! So everybody is happy. FYI: This is actually called pogo anarchism. On a serious note I am not really what you call an authoritarian, I may be a traditional anarchist, I have not exactly figured that one out, I just see Libertarianism as hypocrisy. |
|
|
|
|
Stop it with the triangles already, if a method does fail multiple times it does not make sense to use it again till it works.
|
|
|
|
I support the idea of libertarians moving somewhere remotely. Especially if it is so remote that I will never be there. |
|
|
|
come to daddy..
That was a quick $5 drop ... Was that due to the last 5 posts here? rpietila panicked Did sound to me a lot like his posting was an attempt to prop up the market with words more than money Well he's in good company. But we now know that he bought at least 13 bitcoins. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin will become obsolete once there is a cryptocurrency which does exhibit the following properties: - the possibility for split-second confirmed transactions
- logarithmic growth of storage space and network bandwidth for transaction data (Bitcoin is linear to exponential)
- a significant fraction of computation consists of useful work
I know the former two can be solved, only the latter one would require some new innovation. If the new cryptocurrency will keep all the benefits and advantages of bitcoin then maybe yes. But I am afraid that some point are incompatible. (How would split-second confirmations guarantee safety against double-spending? How would logarithmic growth of storage space motivate miners to compete for it? Who will set and influence what is "useful work"?) If I had an answer to these questions I would probably try to implement it rather than posting here. I thought of something along the line of different difficulty targets at once, ie a transaction gets one split second confirmation first, then in the order of seconds, then minutes, hours, days... Storage space has not really something to do with mining, immediately I thought about leaving out the "full node" concept altogether, nodes depending on other nodes to confirm transactions, mine multiple smaller tranactions into larger ones, and so on, there probably is a much more elegant solution though. As for the useful work part, that is something very difficult, I don't really have an idea of how to tackle it, one approach would be to use things like FFT for hashing and use the currency to buy computation power. Miners engaging in some sort of contest instead/in addition to hashing based proof of work, etc... This is very much hazy. |
|
|
|
Here's where your argument breaks down (in my opinion):
You seem to think that the Bitcoin vs. [as of yet unknown altcoin] situation can be compared to the browser history. Major innovations by a newcomer in this field more than once caused the previous market leader to lose its established position (Netscape replaced by IE, IE by Firefox, Firefox by Chrome).
However I hold that the *coin situation is more similar to the history of social networks. A major innovator, with sufficient momentum generated by word of mouth, can sometimes replace the previous market leader -- say, when Facebook destroyed Myspace's entire business model. But innovation and word of mouth do not guarantee success in this field: upon release, Google+ had huge momentum, the whole might of the world's largest Internet company behind them, and was/is arguably a much more pleasant experience than Facebook. Yet, they completely tanked in their effort to even approach the position of Facebook.
The difference is previous investment in the product. Browsers require very little of it (just install a new one), social networks a lot (all your friends are on it, you'd have to convince them to follow you). Now please be honest: in terms of investment, which of the two does a cryptocurrency resemble more?
(caveat: I admit, there's always the possibility to shift your investment from one currency to another, and this is maybe somewhat easier than shifting "investements" in a social network. However, even with the option of trading currencies, this process is not frictionless, and will therefore be a serious barrier for any competitor)
You answered it already, kind of. Once the amount of "friction" is overcome people will switch to an improved system. But that is also not the whole factor: Facebook took over myspace not only because it took over it's consumerbase. It started from it's own consumerbase which wasn't a subset of myspace, other people who didn't previously use social networking started to use it and only after it became larger than myspace people started the switch. This is also why the current "alt chains" aren't a real competition to bitcoin they are essentially part of it. Real competition can only come from outside the project, on a new codebase and from a new group of people as early adopters. I don't even think that such a new cryptocurrency would call itself a "coin" or compare itself with bitcoin for that matter. It being competitive with bitcoin would most likely be only be apparent after the fact. |
|
|
|
|
The only important thing about TA is that it works statistically. If it does it can yield an increase in capital.
|
|
|
|
I would think it more likely that Bitcoin evolves little by little, instead of being entirely replaced by an alt. coin.
Hopefully. But some important innovations are architecture dependent and can not be done. It is at this point where Bitcoin is going to be replaced. Please elaborate; I thought anything can be changed through a hard fork and which ever version has majority support wins out. So I would think we'll start to see minor hard forks and each time it won't seem that big of a deal, but 10 years later you'll look back and think "holy crap bitcoin has changed a lot" For example if I though that i had a much better idea for an alt. currency. I'd say that it would be better for me to make a private road map of how to make bitcoin into my new currency, and make small incremental pull requests over a long time period until i'd managed to change bitcoin into the better currency that i had envisioned; as opposed to trying to start my currency from scratch with zero public support. Of course you might complain "But my pull requests or forks might get rejected"...well maybe that means that other people don't think that your ideas are better than the status quo, and starting your own alt. currency is only a way to postpone that realization. Unless of course you think the current devs are holding bitcoin back by rejecting your code, in which case you take your case to the message boards, if there is popular support for your modifications I'm sure the devs would be persuaded to include the code updates. Yes very much can be changed with a hard-fork, but only up to a point. Currently even something very minor from a software architecture standpoint like the block size limit, which is just a variable when it comes down to it generates massive controversy, and as we have seen bugs. So I don't think that major changes are going to make it through. The examples I posted above are things which could be much more easily implemented by starting from scratch. It's not entirely impossible to do this with a hard-fork but you also have to see this from the innovators perspective: Why try to convince the Bitcoin core team, and try to work with an old code-base instead of starting a own project, especially since the reward from doing so is so much higher? In software development it only makes sense to do a new project once the amount of changes exceed a certain amount. This has been done over and over again and I can't see how cryptocurrencies would be any exception. See Netscape/Firefox/Chrome, Apache/nginx, Gnu/*BSD. If changes are sufficiently numerous people will create another software and this has nothing to do if it requires a hard-fork or not, it simply makes more sense. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
