Back in early 1940's, when everything in USSR was heavily rationed and appropriated for the war, my grandpa used to steal wire which the fences around people's houses were made out of. He then sold them the service of wiring up their houses for electricity, using their own stolen wire.
Sounds like a lot of effort. It probably would have been easier to sell them the service of replacing the wire fences around their house  Having electricity in your home was worth way more than having a crappy rusty fence consisting of some wire wrapped around wooden posts I guess. |
|
|
|
I guess your other option would have been to start a 7% investment scheme, collect enough money from investors to pay off your debts, and dissapear/get hacked/claim you invested in someone else who recently failed. Oh well. Yay for taking the high road  |
|
|
|
|
Back in early 1940's, when everything in USSR was heavily rationed and appropriated for the war, my grandpa used to steal wire which the fences around people's houses were made out of. He then sold them the service of wiring up their houses for electricity, using their own stolen wire.
|
|
|
|
|
1) Your formula is still missing the initial cost of mining hardware. You are accounting for 20% depreciation, i.e. cost to maintain/replace it, based on god knows what, while totally ignoring that in a 54.8 billion economy/total Bitcoin valuation, the total hardware that is mining all bitcoins will be worth a few billion by itself. If we assume that current Bitcoin market value is 110mil, and the total cost of all Bitcoin mining hardware currently working is $500,000, or that at any given moment the amount of mining hardware supporting Bitcoin is worth 0.5% of it's total market valuation, then should Bitcoin become a 54.8 billion economy, the amount of hardware that a government would have to buy initially to gain their 51% is over 274,000,000. To that you can add the 54.8 million of 20% depreciation plus your other costs. And, you're right, it's not much, but it does double your initial investment estimate, and it is using lowest estimates and assuming that the mining hardware will be readily available (a big assumption)
2) I have yet to hear a good explanation of how proof-of-stake (whoever owns the most money controls how much is printed and what rules apply) is any different from a central bank (who have stake by default, and simply control how much is printed and what rules apply). If a government entity is supposed to own the biggest stake, then I see no difference from our current federal reserve system (and it's crap like this that makes me think huge advocates of proof-of-stake are shortsighted idiots)
|
|
|
|
I think a government with your goals would be way more effective if it just slapped a unique id on every dollar, and tracked all the transactions from the central ledger it already has.
Not possible with paper money. VERY possible with a blockchain. Dollars are already tagged with unique serial numbers. Just track who took out the paper, and who redeemed it, in the exact same centralized ledger that tracks all the other dollars. Same as with Casascius bitcoins. Besides, blockchain IS just an accounting ledger. The only difference between it and the central bank ledger is who decides the rules that it must follow. |
|
|
|
BTW, a message to SA. All those horse pics and framed images you found? Congrats. They're not mine.
I guess they just like horse pictures? Not surprised really. People tend to ridicule what they fear to discover (or allow to be discovered) in themselves. I just think it's funny that they went through the trouble of finding something they find uncomfortable, when it's totally unrelated and they really didn't need to put themselves through that. I wonder if they all look at goatsee pictures every morning just to get themselves pumped up for a day of trolling? |
|
|
|
|
BTW, a message to SA. All those horse pics and framed images you found? Congrats. They're not mine. The famous table is. All that other stuff isn't. None of my art is framed or on any walls. And I don't even like horses. They're nasty dirty things. So, yay for looking for crap, finding stuff not associated with me, and attempting to use it to discredit me. Not that I care much, but just wanted to let you know you were wrong, and, pitifully, were forced to look at stuff you find repulsive for no reason.
Cary on.
|
|
|
|
|
If a 51% attack is launched, and a government gets enough control of the currency to dictate where it goes, how much transactions cost, and how much of the currency is created, then how will Bitcoin be any different from the current central bank controlled fiat currency system? I think a government with your goals would be way more effective if it just slapped a unique id on every dollar, and tracked all the transactions from the central ledger it already has. End result will be the same, and it won't cost a ton in mining gear. Especially since the ONLY purpose of mining is to secure the system in a DISTRIBUTED manner. If the ledger is already centralized, there is no need for mining.
Though, I suspect the people would be a bit upset if they found out their government is planning on tracking every single dollar they spend. In much the same way Bitcoin users will be upset if they found out some entity is trying to gain 51% mining power. Also, you are still misunderstanding how Bitcoin works. 51% doesn't give you the control you claim it does. At most, the 51% holding government will be burning a ton of energy while rejecting almost all transactions and transaction fees and creating orphaned blocks, while the remaining pools will continue earning fees and creating blocks the general population would agree to be valid.
|
|
|
|
But ASICs that only know how to SHA256(SHA256()) could have only one plausible, and therefore illegal, use. No-one could easily compete on mining, and since building ASICs requires big factories and investment, it would be easy enough to shut down unlicensed manufacturers. Think, the Treasury would be replaced by an ASIC factory.
Illegal where? Which country's treasury? I think you're falling into the old "Bitcoin only exists within one country, and thus falls under one set of laws" fallacy. |
|
|
|
Is there anyone still living in Gaza who is not involved in wanting to bring down Israel and wishes death to America? I figured since that place is so awful, anyone with any brains has long since gtfo out of there?
Congratulations, your ignorance is spectacular. Gtfo is what people in eastern European countries did after USSR fell apart. That includes my whole family. So, when you live in a country where to the north and east you have Israel that keeps invading you, to the south you have Egypt that gives zero fucks about you, and within the country there is an extremist religious Hamas government that kills you for not following their bullshit religious prohibitions, why wouldn't anyone with any brains try to get out by any means necessary? Please enlighten me so I won't be so ignorant. |
|
|
|
|
Is there anyone still living in Gaza who is not involved in wanting to bring down Israel and wishes death to America? I figured since that place is so awful, anyone with any brains has long since gtfo out of there?
|
|
|
|
Terms of Service
DONT SCAM
- the end -
Doesn't apply. Scammers are still able to use Bitcoin I think the only one that's really possible is "The blockchain is not responsible for your own stupidity" |
|
|
|
I've been in touch with a charity http://hide-e-hole.com, trying to convince them to accept Bitcoin. Here are the emails (last three were sent today) > To: Webmaster
>
> From:
> Dmitry
> Ask a general question:
> Donate funds
>
> Message:
> Hi. I came across your charity on Anthrocon's list of charity
> suggestions. I represent a charity fundraiser called Bitcoin100. The
> gist of our organization is that we try to get charities to add
> Bitcoin as a donation method, and once they do (a process we help
> with), we have 100 people who have already pledged to donate about $10
> each, and make the donation within a week (so about $1,000, just for
> adding the donation option). Accepting Bitcoin also puts you on a list
> of Bitcoin-accepting charities, which is maintained and viewed by
> those involved with Bitcoin, and thus gives you some free advertising
> as well. We have had three charities add the option and receive funds
> already, and hope you could be the fourth.
> Please let me know if this is something you would consider, or if you
> have any more questions.
>
> Thank you
>
> -- Dmitry
> Bitcoin100.com
I would need to research Bitcoin. What is it? What does it do? We can
always use funds, but I don't generally do things like this without lots
of research.
--Barb--
Hi. Sorry for taking a while to reply. I was away in Iceland for a week (vacation). Bitcoin is a virtual currency, like Facebook credits or VISA travel miles, except it's not really owned by any one company and can be sent by anyone to anyone else like e-mail. It's basically a new type of internet money that can be easily exchanged into and out of dollars (or any other world currency). There is a good description of what it is on http://www.weusecoins.com/ For your purposes, you would set up a Bitcoin donation option similar to a PayPal or VISA button (with our help of course), and whenever anyone in the world sends you a donation in Bitcoin, you will receive that amount in USD automatically the next day (receiving Bitcoin from anywhere and converting it to USD takes a few seconds, but it takes a while to transfer that money to your bank account). If you are a registered 501c charity, there are a few companies that will do the service of receiving and converting your money for you for free, otherwise they charge about 2.5%, similar to other business accounts. In short, though, we are willing to help you set up another option with which to receive payments, our group of donators will send you about $1,000 for doing so, and if you get nothing more out of it, you'll at least get the $1,000. What we get out of it, and why we have over 100 people willing to donate $10 or more each, is more awareness of Bitcoin. Since the Bitcoin system is able to send any amount of money to anywhere in the world almost instantly and for free, more awareness and acceptance of it would help out charities and businesses that exist in many third world countries, where banking is nonexistent, and transferring money is impossible. But for them to benefit, they need to know about it, and other people who may be interested in donating or transacting need to be aware of the option as well. We hope increased awareness and acceptance of Bitcoin will help the world overall in many different ways. Plus there's the issue of companies like VISA and PayPal charging very high transaction fees, blocking transfers to certain countries they deem high risk (Russia and India for example), and being a general pain for everyone, and Bitcoin just being a much better system over all. Please let me know if you have any more questions! -- Dmitry Bitcoin100.com Apparently there are a lot of people out on the Internet who think Bitcoin
is perhaps a hoax or at least a very bad idea. What are the risks of using
this? I haven't had time to really find out... I'm having trouble
picturing how this could be dangerous unless people could get into my bank
account.
What is your opinion on this?
--Barb--
That's true, there are a lot of people who misunderstand it, and that's another reason we are hoping to get more people to accept it. The more companies and charities that use it, the more credibility it will get.
Regarding risks, since Bitcoin is digital and irreversible money, it can be stolen like any other file if your computer get hacked. The main risk is having to be responsible for keeping your own coin wallet secure, which means at least keeping your Bitcoin wallets or online services protected with a good password. The second risk is that, since Bitcoin value freely floats on the exchange market, which itself is still small, the value can fluctuate quite a bit at times. There have been cases where I have bought a few thousand dollars worth of Bitcoin, only to have it lose a few hundred dollars of value by next week (overall, the value has been going up though). Both of these risks can be avoided by using a third party service, such as BitPay, that handles receiving coins for you (they manage security risks), and instantly converts what they receive into dollars (eliminating currency exchange risk). I believe they don't change any fees for 501(c) businesses (for the same reason as us: they want to encourage the system to grow). You can also do what they do by yourself by using an exchange like mtgox.com as your receiving account, and setting up your account to instantly convert whatever you receive into USD. In both these cases your only risk is that either of these companies can fail and shut down while you are in the process of receiving/transferring your money to your own bank. Since they will only be sending cash to your personal bank account, they don't have access to be able to pull anything out. And, as I said, the worst case scenario will be that you will get to see how the process works, receive about $1,000 for your trouble, and never get anything through bitcoin or have to deal with it again.
Just some background: BitPay has signed up over 1,500 businesses so far, despite only being about a year old. MtGox exchange has tens of thousands of customers, including wall street traders, and manages over $10,000,000 a month in Bitcoin trades. Some prominent companies that accept Bitcoin are Wikileaks, WordPress, and soon Reddit. And we have signed up 4 charities so far with no issues (it has been very difficult to convince some charities due to the fear and misunderstanding of people like those you found on the internet, and larger charities thinking it's not worth their time to bother). As for it being a hoax, there's no one specifically in charge of or behind the system. It is fully distributed, like e-mail, and is based only on agreement of all participants. So there's really no one to swindle or scam anyone with it. No more than can be done with dollars or euros, anyway.
-- Dmitry
Bitcoin 100
Okay ... this is interestings, but I'm not seeing how people actually make
money at this. Where does the coinage come from in the first place??
--Barb--
It's not a money making scheme, it's just another currency, like dollars or euros, but with two major differences. One is that there is no single entity or country in control of this currency. New currency is created based on an agreed-upon mathematical formula that no one is able to change, and is paid to those who provide computer resources to secure the system. This restricted hard limit on the amount of Bitcoin is what gives it value, since you actually have to work to obtain it instead of just having anyone create it out of nothing. And since no one country or entity is in control, it can be used across borders without restrictions, just like e-mail or the rest of the internet.
The second major difference is that the transmission mechanism is built into the system from the start. Dollars and euros were created before the internet, banks have had to create complicated, and at times insecure systems to get their currencies to work over the internet. This is why bank transfers take days within US, or weeks for inernational transfers, why credit card theft is such an issue, and why businesses and charities can have their payments reversed (chargebacks) without recourse. Bitcoin has the currency transmitting mechanism built in, so coins can be sent between any two people anywhere in the world almost instantly, using computers or phones, with fees ranging from zero to about a half a penny.
The way people make money is by undercutting VISA/PayPal, who charge 3% per money transfer, or Western Union who charge $25 or more, because using Bitcoin one could convert USD to Bitcoin for 0.5%, transfer money to another country for free, and convert back from Bitcoin to local currency for another 0.5%, plus charge another 1% for their services, and their total 2% fee is still lower than 3% of those other guys. They can also set up businesses that they were never able to before. The one I am really excited about is people starting to set up businesses in third world countries in places like Africa and southeast Asia, where getting a bank account is difficult and transferring money costs $25 to $60. There, using Bitcoin they can now sell their wares locally or all over the world, with their bank accounts essentially being on their phones, and where they can receive even as little as $0.25 from anywhere in the world for free These people are only able to make money thanks to Bitcoin.
One of the charities we ended up sponsoring this past Summer was a university medical team that went to a poor village in rural Kenya in order to establish a rudimentary hospital/medical facility. They are still there, and the only way for them to receive money way out where they are is through Bitcoin, which they then can use right away to buy basic medical supplies like bandages and disinfectants. The fact that they don't have to lose 3% or up to $25 on every donation, and can receive donations as small as $1, has been a big boon for them as well.
Aside from the ideology of making banking easily accessible to everyone in the world, without having big banks charging us ridiculous fees and crashing the world economy every few decades, since many of us in the Bitcoin100 group are trying to set up Bitcoin related businesses, or invest in Bitcoin directly, any growth in the currency system is good for us as well, so we make money by investing in it and spreading it's awareness. I hope this answers the "what's in it for us" question.
-- Dmitry
Bitcoin100
As I'm sure we've all known, there's a lot of bad press out there, and people's first impressions of Bitcoin are sadly still heavily influenced by that press. Also, I really need to learn to writer short replies  |
|
|
|
|
You are wrong, because you assume anyone would use a currency with a 51% weakness already in progress, and because your formula doesn't account for the initial investment in hardware required to achieve that 51%. You are only accounting for operating expense with that $212 million.
|
|
|
|
So... can we quote you with: "Any progress on this?" Plenty.
?? |
|
|
|
Of course we are still using euros & dollars, because up to now, no other currency could overcome the bootstrapping problem of network effects, to be useful. Bitcoin is changing that. Thats why we are all here, on the bitcoin forum.
I am here to tell you that you are an idiot. I'm in the educational sector. It is my calling. I'm sorry, what? You're a teacher? Got I hope you're not a university professor, or at least not from any place other than a diploma mill. Your "teaching" style would make you fit only for teaching theology classes, and if you are a professor, I feel sorry for your students. |
|
|
|
|
Hmmm, yep, you're still an idiot. Your entire idea depends on your blockchain based currency being a monopoly. Forcing a fee on spending it will just make people not want to spend or receive your money, and instead will push them to something else. And a central bank capturing 51% will result in either attempt to take that 51% away from the bank, or a quick abandonment of the currency. Who will want to keep mining if the currency, and the main fundamentals that give it value, are under threat? The bank will eventually end up with 100% mining power of a currency that's been abandoned.
|
|
|
|
Wow, bitcoin has helped educate so many people about the evils of libertarian ideology.
The number of people you educate is inversely proportional to how dark your ignore button is. |
|
|
|
No one really cares what other people are into, its just the people who advertise their fetishes that get called out and made fun of
Well, that's kind of the problem. Furry fandom isn't a fetish, just an interest in a certain art style, which also includes a sexual subset (just as there is a sexual subset in anime fandom, and even star trek fandom, from what I've heard), and furry fans tend to stick to their close-knit groups, having their own conventions and meeting, and welcoming anyone else who wishes to join, but otherwise never proselytizing and sticking to their group. Yet some other people really go out of their way to look for "advertisements" and imagine what kind of horrible fetishes someone may be into whenever they see a furry avatar or icon. You know, kinda like some people imagine nasty sex acts whenever they see two guys holding hands. |
|
|
|
You people are weird  Also, extreme homophobes often explain why gays are disgusting by describing the sexual acts they believe gays are into; things like drinking piss, smearing and eating shit, and other EXTREMELY nasty crap that normal gays can't even come up with, let alone find appealing. They find all those sex acts just as nasty. SA's reaction to furry fandom really reminds me of that: no, vast majority of furries do NOT want to have sex with animals (they are dirty and disgusting), and don't masturbate to Disney characters or coffee tables. It's really no different at all from anime fans liking pictures of cute, sexy anime girls/boys. Except it's cute, sexy anthropomorphic girls/boys. There's really nothing more to it, just as there's nothing more to being gay than just liking a certain sex, or to being human than just liking a certain body type (skinny/ full/ blonde/ redhead, etc.) But some people really need to give themselves reasons for feeling justified about why they find something weird or wish to hate something/someone, so they come up with all these nasty fantasies to make themselves feel better. They're still assholes for doing it, though. And the SA bunch seems especially justified at coming up with these fantasies, and being assholes about them. No, I'm pretty sure the vast majority of bitcoiners didn't get involved with any scams. No, they are not computer illiterate idiots who don't understand hardware and could burn their house down from mining. No, they are not financially illiterate to the point where they don't understand that mining loses them money (my rig makes $90/month, and costs $45/month in electricity). And a lot us here also have degrees and MBAs in finance, economics, and whatever. Just because SA people's Keynesian ideals don't agree with the Austrian ideals of this group doesn't mean that one group is haha-wrong. Both are *methods* which work based on historically proven rules. The argument is mostly on what the outcome will be. SA isn't any more correct than Bitcoiners in their guesses about the outcome, but at least bitcoiners are willing to debate, discuss, and learn, while SA is too much of a circle-jerk. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
