I consider myself a mid-adopter. Very early on, and probably in my buying phase, I planned to cash out at 10x if we got that far to get back my initial speculative outlay. Then lose about 1/2 of my BTC at 100x. I'm in the process of doing the latter, but getting at my deep storage wallets is deliberately time consuming and laborious. Plus, I've got all the fiat I want and need for the immediate future and I'm getting a bit greedy and hoping for further increases over the course of the year. As for my remaining stash, I've not thought about it in detail like the earlier targets. It'll be a matter of watching the evolutionary twists and turns that Bitcoin makes, watching what happens in alt-cc-land, seeing what other hobbies and interests I might develop which would benefit by cash-flow, etc. Buy yes, I intend to die with a relatively small number of BTC under my control. I did my duty of mopping up excess liquidity back when that was a problem and I plan to continue my obligation of releasing the BTC back into the economy as and if they become increasingly dear. I've never been so handsomely rewarded for doing so little  I don't think I can ever reach 100x (some people already have if they bought for 10$ or mined). I heard about bitcoin when the price was ~100$ so my chances are very low, whatever, I'm happy anyway.  People scoffed at dollar parity. At going from $1 to $10. Then 10 to 100. Then 100 to 1000. With wide adoption for currency, store of value, colored coins etc, who knows the upper bound. |
|
|
|
|
Go ahead and create your alt-bitcoind and see how many people want to use it. That will tell you if people think it is a good idea or not.
|
|
|
|
Perhaps this should be looked at as a peer to peer issue instead of a web site or hard coded address. Ultimately I like this type of idea since centralization is anathema to bitcoin. However, the problem I'm specifically interested in is making bitcoin web services more secure for novices who are unlikely to download ZIP files and do checksums themselves. Installing P2P software would likely be beyond this target group's skill strengths as well. Maybe instead of a brand new centralized service, this could be something as simple as a single portal/checksum page hosted on a reputable site such as bitcointalk.org or bitcoin.it. Simple is key as you state. Using the web site idea in the initial post, perhaps each site could query the distributed hash for a particular web site. Each of the of sites could continually verify that none of the others have been compromised. E.g. Main site checks each of the others, but the others continually check other sites in the network against their hashes. The more sites running the extra bit of code the stronger the guarantees that all are safe. You could have a plugin available for those who are technically advanced to automatically verify every site. |
|
|
|
What is the best no sync BTC wallet there is no scam please and no virus.
Check out the ones listed here at the top with their own child boards: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=37.0If I understand the question, one of them might be what you are looking for. |
|
|
|
|
Perhaps this should be looked at as a peer to peer issue instead of a web site or hard coded address. This prevents single points of failure. Perhaps something built on namecoin, bit message or the like (this is very off the cuff, but doing it in a distributed manner is important I think.)
Other projects could find this useful for sure.
|
|
|
|
|
China tries to clamp down on the internet with the great firewall of China. Even then though information about Tibet, democracy, etc. reaches China. Yes, I do not doubt that the undersea cables etc would have issues, but to completely shut down the internet between the warring parties would be quite hard. Between radio, satellite, cable, sneakers etc, it seems likely that some packets would still make it. Think about this: suppose Switzerland is neutral, would both sides keep internet access to them? All it would take would be some time each day/hour/week to resync the blockchain via a neutral country (or directly). Perhaps North Korea or Cuba (maybe China) could pull off a completely cut-off from the world, but for many others it would be much more damaging to do so as compared to the benefit.
A problem would be that I think it unlikely that any splits would result in a near 50/50% break. It would probably be something like a 80%/20% break of hashing power so that the smaller side would continually be on the shorter side of the chain. Eventually they would in all likelihood stop mining (because it would be pointless since their blocks would never be included), and just broadcast transactions to the side with the larger hashing power.
Obviously this doesn't consider the actual damage a conflict could do to infrastructure - EMP, nuclear, biochem etc, just state actions that would attempt to prevent interaction via internet between the countries involved.
|
|
|
|
The moment you freeze yourself your body is shattered into millions of little pieces, it will never be possible to reconstruct, only pseudointellectuals think of freezing themselves.
They don't 'freeze' you. Alcor vitrifies you to avoid being "shattered". Some of the "pseudointellectuals" include Ralph Merkle of the "Merkle tree", used in bitcoin among man other things. Marvin Minsky, who started the MIT AI lab among many others are involved with Alcor. Eric Drexler (nano tech pioneer) has written positively and may be a member. Many others who are not pseudo-intellectuals. You sound like uninformed people when they talk about bitcoin. If you are buried or cremated, the odds are zero. With cryonics, they could be 1 in 1000 or even 30%. No one knows yet, but the odds are non-zero. You should do some reading here: http://www.alcor.org/Library/index.html |
|
|
|
A mixer will not hide the coins, you cannot hide in the Bitcoin network what so ever.
Mixers just spread the coins around many places, but they still link back to the original wallet the FBI had.
You don't even need to create a fork to reject anyone/place/business that has FBI tainted Bitcoins.
You don't have to create a fork, you can do it yourself on your own. Let us know when that software is available, but note that once (if) the FBI auctions those coins (probably years away) within a very short period it will be nearly impossible to get a bitcoin payment without having tainted coins at some point. If you want the network to reject the coins as was stated above, then you will have a hard fork. It would be interesting to see how many people join the NonFungibleCoin network. I know that many people will not want to establish the precedent that anyone is able to decide for any particular reason in the future that their coins are no longer spendable. |
|
|
|
They were fine before the FBI took them but not now?  They were never fine as deemed by the FBI. The FBI however cannot claim use of the coins along with the original owner, owners, individuals, etc. They must be wiped from the Bitcoin network since they are disputed within another network. These outside network systems cannot create a negative impact on Bitcoin or it then defeats the purpose of using this system for holding and exchanging value on a global scale. We the community are aware of these coins and they have been marked for this purpose, it does not matter how much you try to "wash" the coins, they will forever be locked in the Bitcoin system. Let us know when you update the software and hard fork bitcoin to do this. It will be fascinating to watch. Ruining the fungibility of bitcoin is such a "great" idea I am sure you'll get at least a half dozen people to switch to your new alt-coin fork. |
|
|
|
Perhaps if this economist had done some research about bitcoin prior to this question he wouldn't ask something that just makes him look unprepared and foolish. [edit: I see some good responses above,a and many more have been discussed ] Economist Brad DeLong poses a question about Bitcoin: Underpinning the value of gold is that if all else fails you can use it to make pretty things. Underpinning the value of the dollar is a combination of (a) the fact that you can use them to pay your taxes to the U.S. government, and (b) that the Federal Reserve is a potential dollar sink and has promised to buy them back and extinguish them if their real value starts to sink at (much) more than 2%/year (yes, I know). Placing a ceiling on the value of gold is mining technology, and the prospect that if its price gets out of whack for long on the upside a great deal more of it will be created. Placing a ceiling on the value of the dollar is the Federal Reserve’s role as actual dollar source, and its commitment not to allow deflation to happen. Placing a ceiling on the value of bitcoins is computer technology and the form of the hash function… until the limit of 21 million bitcoins is reached. Placing a floor on the value of bitcoins is… what, exactly? At the moment, it’s only a $10 billion bubble–or, if you are going to convince me that it is not a bubble, you are going to have to find me a market player willing to become a bitcoin sink… http://equitablegrowth.org/2013/12/28/1466/watching-bitcoin-dogecoin-etc |
|
|
|
Yeah, go ahead and fork Bitcoin and freeze the FBI coins, I'll sell all my coins on the new fork and purchase actual Bitcoins with the proceeds.
I approve.
Shhhhhh.... I was not going to mention this little hole in their plan until they went to all the trouble of creating the anti-FBI-coin-client, getting miners on board, creating exchanges, coming up with a new snazzy name, pumping up the value a bit, etc. Now that they realize that every single person that holds coins before their fork can dump their coins at any time you may have just killed their idea and any chance we may have had of killing off their alt while making a small profit. You let the cat out of the bag as far as all these "let's just fork the chain" threads go. Darn.  On the upside maybe we will see less of these types of threads in the future.Yeah, right! And no one will even notice Holliday's plan because they won't read this before suggesting the same blacklist plan again and again and again, so the plan is safe! |
|
|
|
I agree, it will also be a good thing when the original miners (such as Satoshi himself) finally use at least some of their coins, which will have the result of better distrubting the wealth to the masses allowing it to function much more like a currency than a commodity. But here is the difference; Explain in details how the dump of BTC in the exchange markets will result in a better distribution of wealth to the masses. By the way, BTC is neither a commodity or a currency. For someone which praise itself as "studied" you lack the fundamental understanding of what exactly is Bitcoin. Satoshi and the original miners have an invested interest (even if it where only based on greed) to do so in a constructive fashion, such as starting an ETF like TradeFortress had done. Yep, great comparison you did. Do you even know that Tradefortress was running an illegal enterprise and he lost peoples funds? I think he is confused. I think he was talk about FIG (Fortress Investment Group) with regard to their new fund (not an etf yet) and meant a vested interest vs an invested interest. Of course, he could have meant TradeFortress, but that wasn't an etf either and as you said, he stole funds. |
|
|
|
This has been discussed ad nauseum but once again:
Once the trial and appeals are all done the FBI will auction off the coins, most likely in medium sized blocks of coins on the one of the various goverment auction web sites they have already created for exactly the purpose of auctioning off seized assets. Go check out these web sites, you can often find boats, airplanes, jewelry, helicopters, etc for a pretty good price. To them Bitcoin is just another asset to be auctioned off for USD that they can use to line their budgets.
Anyway, the coins will be sold to whoever bids the most for them.
Your proposal would harm the auction winners - not the government.
+1. Once you establish the precedent of making some coins more equal and others, bitcoin will be in bad shape. It will become a slippery-slope of trying to decide who is worthy and who is unworthy. |
|
|
|
Dear forum administrators,
Can I have back the forum I met in 2012? The level of bullshit being throw here at every new topic is spectacular!
When we will have quality control of topics?
The unnecessary information being spread here is creating a disincentive to participants genuinely looking for a coherent discussion.
Actually, 2nded. Maybe we should make a post in Meta. Just as the min Txfee is due for another decrease, it may be time to up the time newbies spend in purgatory. 4th'd. There are guidelines for what goes where - this seems political, perhaps move it there. It is similar to the Press section which has become unusable if your are looking for notable press mentions involving bitcoin - now it is anything goes. |
|
|
|
No mention of bitcoin
For the last few weeks it seems it doesn't matter if bitcoin is mentioned, whether the posts follows the guidelines posted at the top or anything else in the Press area. I think Jeff and the other mods just gave up. It seems like no one cares and it seems that consequently the Press section is becoming less useful since it is no longer "Notable press hits" with any type of consistency in the format. ;-) |
|
|
|
|
So about 23% of the US total population, nearly 30% of the US adult (over 18) population, and about 60% of US households are impacted.
How many more times will something like this happen before security is taken seriously?
|
|
|
|
|
No recycling mechanism, no. There has been a lot of discussion on the forums about this and the ramifications etc over the years if you want to explore it more. :-)
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps they mean that French bankers have a limited future?
|
|
|
|
This seems to have been ignored in many places, but has some current info directly from them if anyone missed it: https://vip.btcchina.com/page/notice20140108LOOOOL. WTF? I need to ask again. Does anyone have insights on BTCChina? The whole exchange has become a fucking joke. Seems like they are done already. Only keeping it "alive" with some fake trades obviously.
I bet a single big player could easily bring the BTCChina rate down to 0.
|
|
|
|
What would happen to bitcoin if the planet for some astronomically small chance got a world wide power outage for a day? Would the network and block chain survive such crash or would everything get irreversibly messed up?
As above, if only for one day, then when the power came back, the bitcoin network would return and resume exactly where it left off. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
