...
I'm not saying I like the Dollar, I'm just saying that it is more popular than gold not because it's a better currency, but because of what we're allowed to do with it.
Imagine you have a system similar to that omnipresent dollar, and it has the properties of a good currency at the same time. How would you value that system? Dollar, gold , bitcoin you name it is only a system that passes on information, and rather important one, that goes about real work value in certain amount of time. Mess up with it and you control how people act or live their lives. Btw, I don't see how anyone can impede you do things with any good tool, like a hammer for example which it can build or kill for it's owner, so why money should be different? I don't subscribe to "we're allowed to do things with it". Exactly, at a higher abstraction level it does not matter what kind of physical or digital form it takes, it's all about the properties of the system. I think a good system should be able to present some kind of general fairness, gold is much better in this regards, at least anyone can dig out gold without become the central bank, and the labour inputed in creating money is equal to the worth of money itself |
|
|
|
It's a game, not an accurate model.
Of course it's a game, but at a higher abstraction level, everything is a game, the solar system is also a game played under certain physical rules. Can you point out why printing money does not work by some real facts? I think basically the printing of money works, the economy developement after 1971 has proved this, but the big question is why only a selected few can print money, and how we can make sure their printed money are used on something that people really need |
|
|
|
Just read this:  --------------------------- He added that he thinks Bitcoin is poised to be a true game-changer for the business world, and the tech community in particular. “Hackers are the animals that can detect a storm coming or an earthquake,” he said. “They just know, even though they don’t know why, and there are two big things hackers are excited about now and can’t articulate why–Bitcoin and 3D printing.” |
|
|
|
3. The economy activities are driven by currency, not demand. People have all sorts of demand, but unless they get currency first, they will not easily get their demand fulfilled, even others have the product they want， their product might not interest others. In today's society most of the goods/services can only be purchased with currency, not through barter. This had some influence on people's behavior, they use the currency as a standard measurement of value. And this is just plain wrong. Economic activity is not driven by money. It's made easier by money, but it's driven by demand. What you have to realize is that even if you're buying something with money, you're still using barter. Money is just a universally accepted barter good. I remember that I played a game called SimCity many years ago, in that game you are the mayor start with 50,000 dollar, you have to build the road, build the water pipes, provide electricity and plan different district as residential district/business district etc... And there will be people moving into the city and work there, and give you some tax income Due to limited budget, I have to start with building small and functional blocks and slowly accumulate more income through tax and upgrade the size and capacity of the city little by little But the first thing I did, is to use a tool to modify the start budget to be 1 billion dollar, so that I can build whatever I want. In fact, after removing the limit on the currency, I can drive very large government projects quickly like highway, tunnels, airport, nuclear power plant and modern minicity, all with fiat money I created by typing 0s, and many people moved into this modern city and build many other things they like, every thing looks great, the only limitation is time when a new technology is available, and the amount of police I have to set at each block to reduce the criminal rate That's my experience, the more currency you have, the more economy activities you can drive, this is just a common sense, do not need any second thought. Just like when a big customer arrived, everyone will be able to make big money. They never thought that the money itself will lose value unless they all get access to that newly created money at the same time |
|
|
|
I have my issues with coinbase (like them randomly deciding to declare my purchases high-risk after 4 days of entering said purchase and making me miss out on HUGE profits AND after I've successfully bought through them for thousands of USD for months) but it sounds like you're just a mad bro.
Strange, I've heard about this "too high-risk" claim several times recently, it seems that they are a bucket shop that bet against customers I am not against bucket shops, I have several accounts at bucket shops, but even bucket shops have their business model, if a bucket shop constantly cancel the order, means they are just too illiquid to be fully operational Anyway, a bucket shop is not an exchange, but a casino. Investing 5 million in a bucket shop is not some thing worth mention |
|
|
|
|
I think localbitcoins.com will be enough good, you can even meet the person and do the transaction face to face, just like any second hand trade
|
|
|
|
Looking at this IR image, this part (white color) on the last sub module at the end of heatsink could have a very high temperature when not properly cooled, adding an exhaust fan should help I measured a 7c degree difference between intake temp and exhaust temp when there are two exhaust fans added  |
|
|
|
|
Look at how banks made it for today's normal user, currently I have seen 2 different implementation:
1.
The user get a smartcard which hold their private key, and a card reader which should holds bank's public key (not sure). There are four functions on the card reader: "login", "buy", "code", "sign"
When you do a login or a purchase, you first input your user name on website, and you get a control string from the bank, and press the corresponding function button and input the control string into the cardreader, then you need to input your pin code (like bitcoin client's wallet password), then the card reader will generate a signature string and you input that string into the page of the website to confirm the login or purchase
2.
The user get a signature generating device which contains exactly the same algorithm the bank's software is using. User need to input 2 control strings in sequence to generate the signature, there is also a pin code challenge for that device
In both case, users have the key stored in a hardware, and the security for that key is 3 levels: 1. physically 2. the pin code to the key 3. The account that is connected to the key
If someone successfully steal the hardware key, he still need to have the pin code (the device automatically locked after 3 failed attempts), and even if he get the pin code, he still need to know which account this key is related to at the bank
And if the user lose the key, he will call the bank and block the key immediately, bank will generate a new hardware key and send it to user
|
|
|
|
No, grandma must understand public key and private key, there is no way to jump over this fundamental mechanism of cryptography  I think a good move is to make a physical private key just like grandma's key to her house |
|
|
|
In this case, there is no money involved, the consumption ends when I ate the lunch and his children ate the apples, nothing left, no futher economy activities
Except the $10 he didn't have to spend at the market for apples got spent elsewhere, creating economic activity. Money is just grease for the gears of commerce. They still move if you're bartering, just less smoothly. Suppose this $10 is the only money in the whole system The purpose of my experiment is to study the difference between currency and general goods/services, not from a user perspective, but rather from a currency maker perspective (why making currency is different than making other general goods/services) So far some points: 1. Currency will never get consumed, so they will not disappear from the economy. General goods/services will get consumed and disappear from circulation, so they need to be produced continuously 2. The currency depreciate slowly while general goods/services depreciate quickly, so the currency works as a store of value. This is maybe the most important difference, anything with value that lasts longer than currency should be able to work as a currency to exchange value (gold is such a good currency since it almost never depreciate, while silver is not so stable, could be oxidized) 3. The economy activities are driven by currency, not demand. People have all sorts of demand, but unless they get currency first, they will not easily get their demand fulfilled, even others have the product they want， their product might not interest others. In today's society most of the goods/services can only be purchased with currency, not through barter. This had some influence on people's behavior, they use the currency as a standard measurement of value |
|
|
|
Anyway the difference is, if I just consume it, it will not create any further economy activity, if I spend the money to exchange for it, the money I spent will cause a chain of economy activities. So the economy activities are caused by currency but ends at consumption of the goods/services
You get the "missing the point" award. Unless you do all the work yourself every act of consumption drives the economy. There is no functional difference between a $10 lunch you made at home, and a $10 lunch you bought at a restaurant. Both created $10 of economic activity. To illustrate the difference more clearly: I still use $10 worth of goods to exchange for a lunch, but this time I use one basket of apple grown from my tree. The restaurant owner need to buy some apples for his children, so he exchanged the lunch for my basket of apples and gave these apples to his children In this case, there is no money involved, the consumption ends when I ate the lunch and his children ate the apples, nothing left, no futher economy activities But, if I first sell my apples to the market and make $10 cash, and then spend the cash to buy the lunch, this cash will be spent again by the restaurant owner to buy apples from the market and my apples still would be consumed by him, but some one in this chain of activities (for example the apple retailer) could make some money too, so at least we could say that the introduce of currency will cause more economy activities |
|
|
|
My recommendation  1 BTC = 100 bitcarat 1 bitcarat = 100 bitgrain 1 bitgrain = 100 bitnano 1 bitnano = 100 satoshi |
|
|
|
Well, you could decide to keep the lunchbox for a while and then sell it for $ 10….
Money is easy to keep safe and to transfer to other people than, let say, a sandwich. However, in countries that experienced a currency crisis (Argentina default 1999-2002 or Ruble crisis 1998), you can see that barter were used for a while instead of currency transactions. In this case goods and/or commodities were more trusted than “money”.
You have some good point here: Money can be stored for a long time (if the trust is not broken), and it can exchange for a big variety of other goods/services. I think this is the right direction to further dig into Some times when in a currency crisis, you need to do barter for a while, but since the above mentioned currency's universal equivalent property, people will always prefer to use such kind of medium of exchange |
|
|
|
In the first case, I ate a lunch, did not create any other economy activity
No? You sure about that? What did you have? It cost $10, so if you avoided economic activity, it must have all been home-grown. Which means that $10 must be the pro-rated "labor" cost. How much are you "paying" yourself to do all that work? Even a tomato sandwich is a lot of work, if you did not create any other economic activity thereby. You have to grow the tomatoes, and the wheat for the bread, maintain the cows and chickens for the milk and eggs, I suppose you could have it on sourdough, so you've got a wild yeast, rather than a commercial one. That still leaves salt. I hope you used sea salt, mining salt is notoriously difficult and laborious. And if you used any condiments other than that salt on your sandwich, that's even more work. I like mayo on my tomato sandwiches, how about you? That's more eggs, oil, vinegar, more salt, maybe some lemon juice, sugar... your little backyard garden is starting to turn into quite the plantation. Or maybe you bought the bread, mayo, tomatoes and salt? With $10, that leaves enough for a bag of chips, too. And that creates economic activity. Call it "I, Sandwich." That box of lunch I have at the beginning of the experiment can be just bought with $10, the point is that it should have the same value as a $10 cash note, to be able to comapre Anyway the difference is, if I just consume it, it will not create any further economy activity, if I spend the money to exchange for it, the money I spent will cause a chain of economy activities. So the economy activities are caused by currency but ends at consumption of the goods/services Have you heard about the planned economy? In a planned economy, everything you get is just goods/services from the government, only very little money, so as my experiment shows, without money, there will not be a chain of economy activities. Normally people say the shortcoming of a planned economy is that they do not have some kind of price/market mechanism to efficiently allocate the resource, but I think maybe the core reason it did not work well comes from there is very little money used in that kind of economy |
|
|
|
the absolute beauty of bitcoin is it comes into existence without debt. ever wonder why our government does not issue its own currency without debt?
Gold also come into existence without debt, and these are honest money, but I just don't know under what circumstance the government abandoned the gold standard and FED started to print money for themselves Academically there was a claim that the money supply could not keep up with the trade growth and without added money supply, a rise in currency value will hurt investment. But maybe that is just an excuse, it had something to do with the vietnam war, they were running out of money and need to finance the military spending through more fiat money |
|
|
|
Define "big difference", because I don't see it.
In the first case you had to prepare the food and obtain the know-how in order to do that. You also have to clean up afterwards. You input additional time.
You also ate a lot more than you would have at a restaurant, so in the second case you ate let's say $5 and created $5 of economy activity.
In the first case I ate fast food in a box which cost $10, just I had the food, not money I start the above experiment with something that has value $10 (either a box of food or a $10 note), and I'm going to consume it. There are two different way to consume that value, but the result is totally different In normal economy books, they always tell you that money is universal equivalent, but in this case a 10 dollar note is not equivalent at all with a box of fast food which priced at $10. The dollar note can create economy activities again and again without being consumed, but a box of fast food can not, that is the big difference I'm looking into: What makes currency so different than consumable goods/services |
|
|
|
|
I have $10 worth of lunch, I eat it, it's gone
I have $10 in cash, I spend it to buy a lunch and eat it, it's gone too. But, that $10 note now becomes the income of the restaurant, they will spend it later, which will cause another $10 income for another guy, and so on...
In the first case, I ate a lunch, did not create any other economy activity
In the second case, I still ate a lunch, but I created a serial of economy activities
Why such a big difference just because the existing of currency? Is there something fundamentally different in the currency than general goods/services?
|
|
|
|
|
So instead of 8 chips, the single will use 16 chips, it is a nice move that leaves a lot of room for chips. I remember that they said the test for running at 500Mhz is problematic but chips can run stable at 300Mhz, e.g. 4.8GH per chip
|
|
|
|
My unit stuck for the first time today, after upgraded to the latest firmware for just 5 days, although now there is no cgminer restart, the unit totally stopped working. When this happens, have a look at the cgminer status tab, what normally looks like:  does it turn into:  ? In that case, the FPGA controller is to blame (me thinka) The software shuts down mining to prevent damage as it can't read out any of the values Only a hard reset (power down, wait 10 seconds, power up) will reset it If anybody knows a solution, please share :-) It's the second case, no data from cgminer status, seems the FPGA is the problem here And the terrible thing is, all the mining modules were still hashing and generating a lot of heat but the fans did not spin enough fast since there was no read out from the temp sensor, so they became extremly hot when I open the case I really want some function to set the fan speed to a fixed value so that in a worst case scenario the modules will not be burnt |
|
|
|
There wouldn't be a fee to exchange gold if it was a country's main currency, because you would be trading directly for gold. That's like an American saying the USD is better than the EUR solely because he has to pay an exchange fee each time he spends it.
Dollars are more convenient than gold for other reasons: Less bulky, you don't have to exchange them before you spend them, everyone is paid in them and you are legally obligated to accept them as payment for debt. In order to have the same benefits (besides the last one) gold needs to be commonly accepted and available in certificate form, in other words, the way the Dollar used to be when it was backed by gold.
If everyone can generate their own dollar like dig out gold, then it is true, otherwise there is a question why only a few selected person can do that For example, in an election one party promise to not print more money and another party promise to print 4x more money, then you have a choice. Bitcoin is such kind of choice, and it is not backed by any political organization |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
