Did you miss the LIBOR news?
 Shit, forgot about that. Point taken, I was completely wrong. |
|
|
|
This could be said for anything really. If you bought a house in August instead of buying bitcoins then you also lost out on the capital gain. Or if you kept your money in the S&P instead of bitcoin, then you lost on those gains. It's just nonsense to try to make BFL look bad for your decision.
The difference is that when you buy those things, you get a product. It's an even exchange at the time, and you have the chance of your product either making you money, or growing in value itself. That's how exchange rate risk is avoided: quick exchange. Here, people paid for the product, but got nothing in return. The decision was bad, but it wasn't "yours." It was a decision influenced by BFL with their delivery claims, and the opportunity cost to the buyers is entirely their fault. I wonder how many people would have preordered back in August if they knew that ASICs would come out in January, WAY after the block reward halving, and the expected rise in BTC value? I'm sure more than a few people were also expecting to get at least a few weeks of 50BTC/block mining as well. |
|
|
|
What makes this easier then logging on to IRC and following the same instructions they give you, it is legit the same thing.
GPG has easy to use GUI, yes, but not OTC. Compare Please enter your GPG key ID
... (retrieves name/etc information from mit.gpg.edu) ...
Please verify this identity by decrypting this string and entering it into the box below
VERSUS Join Freenode IRC. Use the /join command to join the #bitcoin-otc chatroom. Message gribble privately. Follow these instructions
Note: if you have already registered using Bitcoin address authentication, use the 'echangekey' command to add a GPG key to your account.
To register the key, you will create an account with the bot with the gpg eregister command. The command takes the following arguments:
nick: your username in the bot's GPG database. It doesn't have to be the same as your irc nick, nor does it have to have any relationship to the name on your GPG key. For convenience, most people choose their IRC nick here.
keyid: your 16-digit gpg key id of your pubkey (the last 16 digits of your key fingerprint).
keyserver: optional, specify a keyserver from where the bot can retrieve your public key. If nothing is provided here, bot will by default try retrieving from subset.pool.sks-keyservers.net and pgp.mit.edu.
By default, gpg --list-keys returns 8-digit ID's. You can find your 16-digit gpg key id by running:
gpg --list-keys --keyid-format long
You should see a line similar to
pub 2048R/81898844A1BF37D6 2011-03-06
where 81898844A1BF37D6 is the key ID that the bot needs.
So you might run the following, on IRC, to register with the bot:
;;gpg eregister BobJones 81898844A1BF37D6
Or how about To verify your login, please copy and decrypt this string using your GPG software, and paste the decrypted string in the box below
Now that you have registered, you can go to any BTCJam user's page, read their OTC ratings, and add your own just by clicking the "Rate User" button, selecting -10 through +10, and entering comments in a box.
VERSUS GPG authentication If you have already registered (see section above) you do not need to register again, instead just use the gpg eauth command, and supply it with your registered username as the only argument. For example: ;;gpg eauth BobJones Now complete your authentication by decrypting your one time password. One time password The bot will respond to your registration/authentication request with a URL pointing to an encrypted document containing your one time password (OTP). <gribble> Request successful for user <yourname>. Get your encrypted OTP from http://bitcoin-otc.com/otps/665FC11DD53E9583Your task now is to decrypt the message. Visit the link provided, copy the encrypted message (the entire content of the page - so using keyboard shortcuts, you could hit Control-A, to select all, then Control-C, to copy), then run "gpg --decrypt" command (yes, actually press enter to run the command, before pasting the encrypted message) and paste in the encrypted message. If gpg prompts you for your passphrase, type it in and press enter. At this point, if you are on Linux, press Control-D to terminate input. If on windows, press Enter, Control-Z, Enter to terminate input. Gpg will spit out the decrypted OTP. It will look something like this: freenode:#bitcoin-otc:6132ffd1c3c4468e40303d844f3e30661bc34617054f7cc5e3fa03c8b41c376e Now, supply the OTP to the bot through the gpg everify command. Example: ;;gpg everify freenode:#bitcoin-otc:6132ffd1c3c4468e40303d844f3e30661bc34617054f7cc5e3fa03c8b41c376 Rating Command index Here's an index of commands relating to the OTC rating system. You can get more info about the arguments they take using the 'help' command with the bot. rate: Enter a rating for a user. Note that new ratings replace old ones, only one trust level exists between any two users. unrate: Remove your trust rating for a user. rated: Show your rating for a user. getrating: Show cumulative ratings that a person received from everyone else. gettrust: Show the cumulative trust for a person coming from people that you trust directly, capped by how much you trust them. For example, if you trust userA at 5, and userA trusts userB at 7, your second level trust for userB is 5 (minimum of l1 and l2 trust links). These are summed across all second-level links. This is arguably a more reliable metric than the global 'getrating' result. You can also request the second-level trust from the point of view of any other user - useful if you yourself are not well connected in the WoT. It's way too much to read even just to figure out what the hell you have to do. Want proof? Check how many people are registered with OTC on BTCJam or localbitcoins. It's easy for some of us, but there's definitely a need to make this simpler. |
|
|
|
If you can't use IRC then you shouldn't be using bitcoins
Tell your parents or your grandparents that if they can't use IRC and figure out how to use commandline interface to control OTC, then they should be able to take out loans for anything. Only a tiny fraction of the world are computer nerds. Not without giving your keys to BTCJam, which would defeat the purpose of being authenticated.
There's no need to give private keys, any more than the need to give it to IRC. I'm just suggesting a web interface that is actually plugged into IRC at all times, which lets you register and verify yourself using the same commands you would use on IRC, but disguised with pretty web entry text boxes with "Copy and paste the decrypted text here" instructions and such, with easy to follow ratings options after you have registered. Is that possible? |
|
|
|
Because banks manipulate markets.
Unless you can provide some specific examples, that statement is about as relevant as "Because banks give you savings accounts." Banks can't manipulate things as deviously as many people think. Seriously? Seriously. Well, they can seriously fuck things up and need bailouts. But they don't quite have the international power to manipulate prices and or affect economy the way Rob E seems to assume. They do try. Then we bail them out. |
|
|
|
Perhaps all we need is a voting system based off bitcointalk messages vote for someone yes or no, or just leave a specific comment then hardline those into people's btcjam profiles crude way but it would solve this temporary reputation problem make users have to wait and gain a rep on bitcointalk first. (months, I know  ) But this has already been implemented: that is what bitcoin-otc.com web of trust is. The ratings come into btcjam.com profiles, too. Note how those OTC ratings are not affected by your borrowing activities on BTCJam, and there's no way to change them (or register for them) though BTCJam... No, the OTC ratings are updated periodically. Of course to rate the user back you must be part of the OTC system. I meant that a lender can't rate someone using OTC through the BTCJam website. They have to go through IRC, which I'm guessing most people have no idea how to do. Not that OTC ratings aren't refreshed. Is it possible to somehow plug OTC things into the site, so that people can do all the registering and rating using simple menus? |
|
|
|
So, then what you guys don't like about FRB is the "virtual" money part. You feel that every dollar on every ledger should be backed by something somewhere. Well, then I'm surprised that you are a fan of bitcoin because there is nothing more "virtual" than a bitcoin.
Anyway, FRB has benefits -- it increases the liquidity and efficiency of the economy. It also has drawbacks -- the leverage makes the system less stable, resulting in booms and busts.
What is the benefit of FRB compared to just printing out more money? At least if you just print it, there is no chance of bank runs. |
|
|
|
Why are you assuming that the law was constructed with moral objectives in mind? Did God create the law in your book?
I thought politicians created the law and that politicians were self-serving. Why would they have designed laws in order to make moral things happen?
Because politicians want to get reelected, so they do things like, "I want to be seen as a nice, moral guy, so lets pass laws that help the little guy. There are a lot more voters who are 'little guys' so that will surely help my reelection." Same reason they pass laws and resolutions banning gay marriage, abortion, etc. They believe it is moral to do so, and hope the rest of the country does too. They don't do it because they've sat done with a pen, paper, and a ton of economics books, to try to figure out how to make things better. I think rather that they designed self-serving laws. In societies with strong, powerful states, these self-serving laws tend to coincide with the interests of average people. In societies with weak states, laws coincide with the interests of a narrow group which the ruler depends on for support. Typically, it is a happy thing to be a citizen of a strong state. You can then live in an environment with reasonable laws that support general prosperity. It is a very sad thing to be the citizen of a weak state. You then live in a state with arbitrary laws designed to support the prosperity of a small group at the expense of everyone else. The main reason why places like China are oppressive is that the rulers/ruling institutions are not stable enough to ensure control over the country.
There are exceptions when rulers do stupid things, of course. But stupid rulers are not the main problem. Even when a strong state does something really stupid (e.g. Soviet Union), their citizens still tend to fare much, much better than citizens of weak states. The main problem is that states are too weak. Weak states are forced to rely on brutal measures that leave the bulk of their citizens poor, while enriching small elite groups.
AnCap, in my view, means many weak states. This is equivalent to enslavement, poverty, and brutality. Statism means freedom, prosperity, and security. Yay Statism! Down with AnCap.
Holy shit! . This is the most genuine example of double-think I have seen yet! Weak states are bad because they use their total and absolute power to enslave and brutalize their citizens, and strong states are benevolent overseers with no power over their citizens, who let them do whatever they want and prosper? Damn, you are NUTS! You know what the difference between USA and Stalin-era USSR was? One country was afraid of it's citizens, too weak to control them, and relied on their input and approval for everything it did, and the other country was too strong for any of it's citizens to oppose it, and controlled every aspect of all its citizen's lives, to the point of being able to take over 6,000,000 of those lives. Either you are some seriously f'ed up Orwellian psychopath, or you have some crazy notions about what strong and weak mean. |
|
|
|
Wow, thanks for all the details! That explains it all much better now. Regarding how your bond system works, that's exactly the setup I am thinking of in the business idea I'm working on: let the market set your rates. Awesome  Also, be careful with the moon rocks. They're pure poison. The who?! We're not just banging two coconut halves together was what Cave Johnson from Portal 2 said. A bit before saying that he got his company to buy moon rocks, mixed them into a drink, and poisoned himself. |
|
|
|
Because banks manipulate markets.
Unless you can provide some specific examples, that statement is about as relevant as "Because banks give you savings accounts." Banks can't manipulate things as deviously as many people think. |
|
|
|
Perhaps all we need is a voting system based off bitcointalk messages vote for someone yes or no, or just leave a specific comment then hardline those into people's btcjam profiles crude way but it would solve this temporary reputation problem make users have to wait and gain a rep on bitcointalk first. (months, I know ) But this has already been implemented: that is what bitcoin-otc.com web of trust is. The ratings come into btcjam.com profiles, too. Note how those OTC ratings are not affected by your borrowing activities on BTCJam, and there's no way to change them (or register for them) though BTCJam... |
|
|
|
I've personally attempted to get two of my regular restaurants on Polk street to accept bitcoin. Apparently sales is not my thing. I'm hoping this is a way to start using bitcoin without having to evangelize and harass people to accept bitcoin.
That's what I'm worried about guys, don't turn this into a religion, Bitcoin's own virtues will come out by itself when the next recession comes along. +1 Give us hoarders some time to buy more cheap bitcoins before you make the price explode through wider adoption please, kthx. |
|
|
|
That is why I compare you to a theologian. You are telling me what to think. You are telling me what you think is moral and immoral, and you expect me to agree with you. If I disagree with your axioms, then you call me a sociopath. The theologian would call me a heretic. The theologian speaks of forbidden fruit. You speak of healthy and unhealthy fruit. To me they are just fruit. I hate you both passionately.
I am simply stating what I believe. I regard anyone who would accept aggressive violence as moral as a sociopath. K, then. I regard anyone who would presume to decide for others what is moral and immoral as a theologian. That is quite ironic, since it is the libertarian's stance that you should be free to follow your own moral codes - as long as you do it on your own property- and that no one has the right to impose their moral codes on others, while it is the Keynesians' stance that politician economists should decide what is moral and immoral, and force those moral codes onto others (e.g. socialism). So does that mean you regard those who pass such morality codes as minimum wage laws, social security/welfare, housing subsidies, etc as theologians? Those are legal codes. Why must you bring in morality? Those legal codes are legislating morality. The legal codes make the statement that it is immoral to have people earn too little, it is immoral to let poor people starve, and it is moral to make sure everyone has a house. They also make a statement that it is moral to take things from those who have things to take, in order to make all those moral things happen. And since these moral decisions are made by Keynesian politicians, and forced upon even those who would disagree with them, by your own words those Keynesians are theologians |
|
|
|
|
Did anyone on this thread already bring up the point that there may not be a need for banking as we know it with Bitcoin? We mainly use banks to keep out money safe and easily accessible, but Bitcoin allows us to do that on our own (that whole "Be your own bank" thing), so the only reason for people to pool their money together would be to invest in something, be it private loans or large business projects. I.e. banking and investment would be "naturally" separated, the way they used to be until a few years ago. Thus, people's personal savings and checking accounts probably won't get wiped out from bank failures due to fractional reserve and other shenanigans the way they did before FDIC came around, and my hope is that those investing would actually do some research into the investment banks they're putting their money into. Am I wrong about this? (Or overly optimistic about Bitcoin technologies that'll let us store our money on our own devices safely enough?)
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, sorry, I was kinda rambling a bit with that long post. Was too tired when I posted it.
I guess from BFL's perspective, they have USD costs for the devices and USD denominated revenues, so their business makes the same USD based profits from the sale of devices regardless of what BTC does. For buyers who paid with BTC that's not the case. But you're right, it's not very relevant. Maybe I'm just feeling guilty that I missed my chance to preorder due to stupid banking restrictions, and thus managed to realize those BTC gains entirely due to dumb luck.
|
|
|
|
That is why I compare you to a theologian. You are telling me what to think. You are telling me what you think is moral and immoral, and you expect me to agree with you. If I disagree with your axioms, then you call me a sociopath. The theologian would call me a heretic. The theologian speaks of forbidden fruit. You speak of healthy and unhealthy fruit. To me they are just fruit. I hate you both passionately.
I am simply stating what I believe. I regard anyone who would accept aggressive violence as moral as a sociopath. K, then. I regard anyone who would presume to decide for others what is moral and immoral as a theologian. That is quite ironic, since it is the libertarian's stance that you should be free to follow your own moral codes - as long as you do it on your own property- and that no one has the right to impose their moral codes on others, while it is the Keynesians' stance that politician economists should decide what is moral and immoral, and force those moral codes onto others (e.g. socialism). So does that mean you regard those who pass such morality codes as minimum wage laws, social security/welfare, housing subsidies, etc as theologians? |
|
|
|
It kills me to agree with Jutarul, but this is actually a pretty good way to measure it. The whole "If you bought BTC instead of XXXX device in YYY time, you would have made ZZZZ" is ludicrous and goes to show that the person making that argument does not understand how money works.
"Hindsight" wasn't my argument. BFL converts all BTC to USD, thus avoiding all currency risk. Buyers on the other hand preorder with BTC, and have their spent BTC sit in limbo until the product they purchase is finally delivered. True, BTC could have fallen instead of risen, which would have made those who have preordered much better off (and BTC did fall from $12 to $10.50 for a time), but this currency risk is taken on entirely by the customers. The decision to preorder a long time ago, which resulted from a huge opportunity cost, turned out to be a bad decision, but the main reason that decision was made to begin with was because BFL claimed that the delivery date was only a couple months away, i.e. BFL claimed that the currency risk would be smaller than it turned out to be. In the end, BFL was not affected, since it is not affected by BTC fluctuation due to holding USD, those who have preordered a long time ago have experienced a huge opportunity cost, and BFL is to blame. (If you think opportunity cost isn't a real cost, the extra $3,000USD worth of BTC that I have and that you don't says otherwise). Now, I'm not saying that this is something that BFL needs to repay to those who have preordered. Currency exchange risk is often unpredictable, and something those who preordered (maybe) likely expected. I'm just pointing out that delays that happen when dealing with two currencies that fluxuate against each other do have very real costs, begin just annoyed customers and whining on forums. By the way, it could have been MUCH worse if BFL had kept all their customer preorder funds in BTC instead, because if people asked for a refund, had BTC lost value, they could refund BTC, and had it gained value, sell it for the USD price equivalent and just return the USD, netting the BTC gains for themselves. It would have been an almost risk-free investment for them. BTW, did BFL mention whether they are still keeping customer's preorder funds in a separate account? Because until they start shipping products, that money is still technically Unearned Revenue, and does not belong to them. I'm assuming that's what they are doing, since they are an LLC, will have to file taxes, and will have to declare it as such, lest they bring the wrath of IRS auditors upon their heads. |
|
|
|
This idiot should tell this to my great grandparents, who had the privilege of having armed men break into their house, line them against the wall, and execute them right in front of my 10 year old grandfather, then have all their property and house confiscated, just because they were Counts. What happened to your family was a crime, but it had nothing to do with police criminality, misconduct, nor breach of the trust of the public who employs them. Police react, and they have no legal responsibility to do anything other than react. In America, the Supreme Court has upheld that law enforcement has no obligation to protect the citizens not in their custody. It wasn't police, it was the special forces tasked with exterminating enemies of state. Back then it was somewhat common to see a black car drive up to an apartment building in the middle of the night, bring out someone with a bag over their head, and never see or hear from a neighbor again. But I was mainly blaming Stalin for that, in response to the video. I am very sorry for your loss.
Don't be. It was way before I, or even my parents, were born, and though my ancestors lots their wealth, we still survived, and me not knowing any other life, it didn't really affect me at all. (Actually, a lot of our wealth was lost a bit before this, when one of my great*x grandfathers gambled and whored most of it away. It may have saved us a bit, since it made my family a smaller target, and not everyone was wiped out.) |
|
|
|
This raises an interesting questions: Is bitcoin (or something like it) the final nail in coffin of nationalism? Once everyone's using the same money... doesn't that largely remove the need for government beyond the local level?
There's still plenty of jingoism, regardless of the currency involved, so no. |
|
|
|
From what I have read in quotations, cunticula is waging a lie/sophism based campaign to discredit Austrian economics (note not refute, but discredit).that tells you he is obviously dishonest and acting in bad faith. And offtopic too. Why don't we just ignore that troll and his off topic ramblings, and go back to discussing the original topic? Thanks.
It does sound like he's building straw men. I don't know what I would call myself (Austrian or not), nor anyone else who self identified as AnCap, but none of them seem to fit cunicula's description. Maybe he just need an enemy to rail against, or needs to justify his extreme dislike of anyone he doesn't fundamentally agree with, so he makes up these boogeymen to parade in public and fight against. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
