|
I find this guy perplexing. Where on earth does all that hatred come from? Bitcoin hasn't been around long enough for people to develop strong prejudices. Someone who simply thinks Bitcoin is a bad idea would not react this aggressively and spend so much energy on it.
Either he feels threatened by the idea of Bitcoin in some way (that would also explain the excessive ridiculing), or it's all just theatrics and he has something else to gain. Attention? I don't quite get it...
|
|
|
|
|
This is what's going to happen if government goes down that road:
1. Bitcoin client is made illegal. People create alternative clients.
2. Bitcoin protocol is made illegal. People start new block chains with slightly modified protocols.
3. ALL "crypocurrencies" are made illegal. People start using Namecoin as a currency.
4. Namecoin is made illegal. People start using other BitX projects as currencies.
5. ALL technologies that use a proof-of-work block chain are made illegal, even if they are not designed to be currencies. People start using other digital commodities that are not based on proof of work blockchains, such as Ripple or OpenTransactions.
6. ALL techologies that could potentially be used as a digital currency are made illegal. This legislation would be so overarching that it would destroy stuff like WoW and Facebook.
7. Country loses competitive edge against countries that don't impose draconian restrictions on innovation.
|
|
|
|
|
Criminalising Bitcoin won't stop criminals from using it.
It will only stop honest people from using it.
Then we are going to live in a world where, de facto, financial privacy and free trade is a priviledge enjoyed only by criminals, but not by honest people.
This will make criminals wealthier and more powerful than they would have been in a world where bitcoin was legal.
Somebody should explain this to these politicians.
|
|
|
|
|
have been waiting for 5 days too.
I suspect someone at mtgox is processing these manually and is now overwhelmed by the the sharp growth in user numbers.
|
|
|
|
I have removed Bitcoin from my site. I, and the people I go to for advice could be wrong- but I don't see a lot of established brick and mortar vendors lining up under the current conditions.
I don't really see brick and mortar merchants as a big market for bitcoin in the short-to-medium term. For them, it offers too few advantages over paper cash. The first markets to adopt bitcoin on a large scale will those that are in need for bitcoin's unique properties, not those that it shares with other payment methods. ie. porn, poker, remittances, MMOGs, mechanical-turk style workers, financial services. From there it will slowly expand to other markets. In fact, brick and mortar merchants will probably be the last to adopt bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
One thing you forgot: configure iptables to block all ports except 8333
|
|
|
|
Flash exploits, Java exploits, browser exploits, and so on. The attack surface of a browser is huge.
The problem is that using the bitcoin client on a system without a browser is extremely cumbersome - I make most payments by copy+pasting bitcoin addresses from the web, so a browser is a must. On the machine where I run bitcoin, I removed all plugins and add-ons from firefox and activated NoScript in addition to switching off javascript. Anything else I can do to reduce the attack surface? |
|
|
|
I don't see how speculating on the NMC price is a good thing for the Namecoin project. Pumping up the value of namecoins will prevent it from being spent on what its purpose is; registrating and updating name keys in the block chain.
That's why future versions of the client should let miners set the registration fees. |
|
|
|
|
Technically, and legally, bitcoin is a commodity, not a currency. Also, bitcoins aren't really "coined" by anyone, not even virtually. They are discovered.
|
|
|
|
That "heist" is an unconfirmed rumor. more FUD.
You are not seriously suggesting that an old forum member faked the heist in order to crash the price? Are you? That wouldn't even make any sense. The fact that a hacker can steal a plaintext wallet.dat is not exactly a secret. This vulnerability has been discussed ad nauseum on this forum and consensus was reached months ago, that it is a good idea to keep a separate savings wallet. Even allinvain admitted that he knew his setup was highly unsafe before his coins were stolen. The heist revealed nothing that wasn't already known, besides it's not a bitcoin vulnerability but an OS vulnerability. Thus the market should ignore such news ... unless ... the market is dominated by ignorant, immature amateurs who don't understand bitcoin and are swayed by whatever they read on Gawker. |
|
|
|
Not sure why you consider this low volume. Over eight million bitcoins changed hands in the last twenty four hours, more than even exist, so some had to have bent sent several times.
They're not changing hands. The heist from allainvain has scared early adopters into to moving their wealth to fresh offline wallets. |
|
|
|
|
Ich poste regellmaessig auf Facebook den USD/BTC Kurs, ohne das Wort "Bitcoin" zu erwaehnen. Bis jetzt hat noch kein einziger meiner Facebook Freunde erraten, um was es sich da handelt. ca. 30 meiner Facebook Freunde sind Techies.
|
|
|
|
|
What I don't get: Why do you self proclaimed businesspeople from the Real WorldTM not do something about this alleged problem instead of coming to bitcoin.org and complaining, hoping that other people will take care of it for you?
This is a decentralized project! There is nothing "official" or permanent about bitcoin.org. Persuade your investors to open another, less controversial "flagship site" and then market it heavily.
The owner of this site is maintaining it in his spare time for free. He owes you nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
@Jessy:
Bitcoin is more than just a technology invented to solve some practical need, like the toothbrush. Right from the start, the motivations for inventing and promoting Bitcoin were very ideological indeed. The technology is inseparable from the ideology, at least so far in the short history of Bitcoin.
You can't really blame the bitcoin.org forums for their anarchist/libertarian roots. The would be like blaming CAFOD for its Catholic roots. When I came here about a year ago, almost all discussions (outside the technical sections) were philosophical in some shape or form, and the bitcoin technology was seen as an experiment to test those philosophical findings empirically.
Then all of a sudden (perhaps to everyone's surprise) bitcoin took off and became something bigger than that. The first time I came here I was also put off a little bit by all that absolutist ideology, but I could see there was tremendous value in the practical applications of bitcoin and decided to stay anyway. Not to mention that I enjoyed having my world view challenged by some very intelligent community members. Tell your small business owner friends to keep an open mind.
I do agree with you though that the joe sixpack "consumer" of bitcoin is better off not learning about the ideological motivations of the orignial core community. Perhaps we need a different website than bitcoin.org to act as a gateway.
|
|
|
|
|
"I believe in the horse, The automobile is just a temporary phenomenon." - Kaiser Wilhelm II.
|
|
|
|
In the long run, the profitability of mining doesn't depend on the price of BTC. It depends on whether you can mine a Ghash cheaper than the competition. and what's gonna happen in 15 days, oh prophet?  |
|
|
|
The concept of value you are probably referring to is purely subjective and therefore I think no absolute value can be defined.
Philosophically no. Practically, some things behave like they have absolute value because there is such broad consensus regarding their usefulness. |
|
|
|
The shift is because of Namecoins value beyond being a currency. Doubt there will be a third, or rather I doubt there will be a 10th...
only a matter of time until there is: IPcoin VersioncontrolCoin BandwidthCoin StorageCoin RoutingCoin TorCoin LegalnoticesCoin WillCoin ObituaryCoin ContractCoin StockholderCoin WebOfTrustCoin MarriageCoin etc. |
|
|
|
I don't agree with Namecoin. People shouldn't have to pay or mine for domains. There should be a huge number of TLD, from .a to .zzzzzzz for example, and anyone should be able to register domains for free. Of course it would be better if DNS was decentralized and P2P.
There will be a huge number of domains eventually, and if you register "unclaimed real estate" you are not really paying for the domain, you are only paying for storage in the block chain. The purpose of the network fees is just to slow down the initial gold rush, not to artificially limit the number of domains. What about highly sought-after domains, such as sex.bit? You are saying that you don't want a market where these domains are traded, because people shouldn't pay for them? Then how do you propose to go about the allocation of sex.bit? by lottery? by decree from satoshi? |
|
|
|
What is wrong with this idea? Anything?
In practice, the only thing that is wrong with this idea for me is that I tend to forget passwords that I don't use often. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
