Sur un autre sujet, ca vous intéresserait une place de marché permettant de trader en EUR avec LR et Liqpay ?
Précise ton idée stp. Tu parles d'une place physique ou juste un site web ? |
|
|
|
I think what your merchant friend was trying to say is that, unlike credit card users, Bitcoin users can't be suckered into signing up for recurrent payment schemes that are then a big hassle to cancel, where the merchant ends up with a lot of recurrently paying customers that are only customers because they are too apathetic/computer illiterate/disorganised/embarrassed(in the case of porn) to cancel the recurring payment. Not because they still genuinely want the product, or genuinely prefer it to the competitor's product.
Bitcoin takes away control from large financial institutions and colluding merchants and gives control back to the user.
I understand that a lot of internet merchants have a problem with this because their whole business model is based on this odious practice rather than offering a superior product.
I for one, would be happy so see these types of merchants go bankrupt one by one as Bitcoin gains popularity.
A more competitive internet economy can only be a good thing.
+1 |
|
|
|
|
This has absolutely no reason to be integrated into bitcoin. Just make it as a separate software if you really want something like that.
K.I.S.S.
|
|
|
|
You are responsible of the security of your data. So there is no "best practice".
Poor argument. Not all people can be an experts in safety. Why not to help people with transparent encryption of wallet.dat? It should improve security a lot. Sure you can do that. But in a separate project. The whole point of bitcoin is not to depend on someone else trust for security. Therefore, I don't care if some people are unable or unwilling to be responsible for the security of their data. Those people could just as well use only mybitcoin.com. If you want you can create a software that will wrap the headless bitcoin client and add a nice security layer around it. But there is no reason to put any of it inside the bitcoin client itself. |
|
|
|
How would these messages be routed? Each router would be physically connected to a dozen or so other routers, as it is now. Using a probabilistic algorithm, the router passes the message to another router it believes is closer to the recipient, if everyone is connected to a dozen other people, most messages could be passed in six hops. If the algorithm is a simple bloom filter, you could store routing tables with a 99.9% success rate for a trillion individual IP addresses in 2 TB (the necessary size of a bloom filter increases proportionally to the number of items it stores, which could pose a problem... I'm not sure if this is any worse than the current situation though).
I think mesh networks, such as Netsukuku or Batman, work more or less like this. But these are not internet networks anymore. They are alternative, quite experimental, networking protocols. |
|
|
|
Une clef privée apprise par coeur et tu transportes ton argent dans ton cerveau  J'iamgine que c'est possible. Ça a quelle taille une clef privée ? |
|
|
|
It is not a random search. Myriad factors conscious and unconscious, human and otherwise determine what is explored and how. When a small group redirects massive amounts of funds either to their own desired research or to research that merely sounds productive we end up with inferior and less knowledge than if people had the freedom to determine for themselves when and how their resources should be deployed.
I agree, even if that was not really my point. Motivation, initiative and will are highly important in any human activity, including scientific research. Clearly intellectual energy would be much better used in a liberal manner. |
|
|
|
"Useless intellectual work" I don't believe in that.
Science is like a random-search. The more scientists you employ, the more discoveries they will make.
This is very much NOT my point. Please read my initial post again. Or maybe I should rewrite it. What I call useless is the intellectual work which is dedicated not to actual research, but only in the determination of the smartest people. Once those smart people are detetected, they are given high social status, without any real requirement for them to do any real actual scientific research. This is a waste of good brain power, and it is a very wrong basis for society. |
|
|
|
What's the best practice with securing the safety of your wallet.dat file?
You are responsible of the security of your data. So there is no "best practice". Personnaly I encrypt backups with GnuPG, and I use a ecryptfs virtual encrypted Private directory to store my wallet.dat file. None of this solution should be included in bitcoin, because I think bitcoin should adhere to the UNIX philosophy : "do only one thing, but do it well". |
|
|
|
First, the purpose of my new page at http://bitcoinaddress.com is to create a master directory of public bitcoin addresses of people and organizations which accept donations via bitcoin. This is a bad idea. Agreed. For many reasons. Maybe it makes sense to keep a list of organisations which accept bitcoin donations. But such a list should consist in organisation names and website links. Nothing more, and certainly not the actual bitcoin addresses. |
|
|
|
What exactly is the purpose of this site ?? |
|
|
|
And I care not at all who might think that is unfair.
+1 |
|
|
|
The video is well done, the music is fine... but I found the way they pass the message too "leftist" to my taste. It looks like they're criticizing people consuming choices.
Still, it's good stuff. There's nothing wrong in criticizing. And I think consumer society actualy worths some critics. I like left-oriented people when they make these kinds of things. |
|
|
|
|
I like it . It's actually good music.
|
|
|
|
No, I don't. The current client exists only because Satoshi wrote it, if you don't like it, write your own and start your own blockchain. If you can get others to join you, that is democracy. Any attempt to compel Satoshi to change his code against his will is not democracy and is not an acceptable form of advocacy.
Im not a fan of democracy. That ends up being two wolves and a sheep voting on whats for dinner. If 51% decide there should be more than 21 million coins what will happen to the 49% who disagree? You cant do anything because you have to follow the block chain the majority decides ? Democracy is certainly not the best system in cyberspace, where scarcity doesn't exist. In real life democracy, the minority has to comply to the decision of the majority. But in cyberspace, there is room for everyone. Any minority which doesn't agree with majority can build its own "kingdom". Sessessionism and autocratism are better fit in cyberspace. For instance, Satoshi is bitcoin's autocrat, as Linus Torwalds is for linux, Marc Shuttleworth for Ubuntu, and so on. And there is nothing wrond with that. |
|
|
|
|
bitcoin4cash.com
It's humanized, but it has worked fine so far.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks !
I'm sure some people will find this useful.
|
|
|
|
I suppose that is the reason to continue to "mine" coins even if the value earned from the mining activity is zero. Under the current system, the value "earned" from mining work units is eventually going to get to zero.
There are transaction fees which were designed for that. And no, there is just no way I'll buy a currency whose total amount is constantly growing, no matter how slow is this growing rate. I don't want to spend days and days watching a total amount number on my computer, wondering if I should or not sell the corresponding currency. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
