|
both of these things would be hugely useful, right?
maybe they can be on the same wiki. ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
folks,
i think that it is time that we, at a minimum, start putting together a wiki guide for making secure bitcoin apps, from web to desktop to mobile.
who is competent enough to make one? maybe start to collaboratively put that together? it's really important that everyone's knowledge on the subject of security start being pooled and guided so that new people coming into the community with an enthusiasm for making great apps, don't end up like bitcoinica!
so how about it?
|
|
|
|
Kim Dotcom needs ISP with big farm for his services, so the first thing that you have to do is convince an ISP that accept Bitcoin as payment.
After that Kim Dotcom will be really happy to accept Bitcoin as payment system. Convincing Kim Dotcom is the last step.
to solve this problem he just really needs to create a great distributed, p2p platform. |
|
|
|
i appreciate it anyway  |
|
|
|
It could be that the economic and social conditions in Switzerland are vastly different from what they are in Detroit or South Central LA.. In an affluent, homogeneous neighborhood with police protection, why would the place be unsafe ? I'd be interested in seeing statistics pointing to an absence of correlation between gun detention rates and crime rates, that is statistics taking into account economic and social conditions. The day the only armed people in LA are the LAPD is the day I move away. They've got to be one of the most aggressive, power-mad police forces in the country, and yes I've been to NY/Boston/DC/etc. At least the punks with guns force the LAPD to think twice about harassing random people. It drives me crazy when rich people think they're helping by sending MORE people with guns into the neighborhood - cops. They're happy to call drug addiction a sickness, but of course violent neighborhoods need more gun laws, not social workers. or maybe they need both? |
|
|
|
Is that right? Using marginal amounts of power per machine, a HUGE pool of GPUs+CPUs wouldn't have any effect?
Not for the single persons in that pool... Imagine 10000 users mine enough to buy ~5 songs every day - would you want to be number 10001?  i wasn't imagining the coin being for those persons, but mined to support the development of the software. |
|
|
|
my tl;dr summary is probably sufficient, along with the amazon description
what it has to do with bitcoin: the internet may not be as open as we would like soon enough, and bitcoin may find itself co-opted one day. i guess i see this book as a good base of knowledge for how these kinds of things have historically taken place, and what we might do to prevent it from happening to these new technologies.
Open and decentralized systems like bitcoin and namecoin have themselves arisen in response to the problem you mention. They don't need to be protected as much as they 'are' [ a part of ] the protection and solution. not if the network are centrally controlled and censored, and not if there is no hardware to run the necessary softare on. |
|
|
|
from @KimDotcom Megabox is coming within the next 4-6 months. We are making good progress. This innovation is going to make a lot of people happy! from @coinlab to @KimDotcom We can make a custom-branded MegaBox bitcoin-mining client. Your customers can earn songs with their idle computers. Emailed you Something very interesting is about to happen  Ugh, that's such a terrible model. Already CPUs and random GPUs can't make much, and it sets people up to think Bitcoin is a thing that slows down your computer and doesn't actually get you anything valuable inside of a decade. Is that right? Using marginal amounts of power per machine, a HUGE pool of GPUs+CPUs wouldn't have any effect? |
|
|
|
From an Amazon commenter: sensationalism sells books.
i guess it is fair to say that, but the book is really about historic examples, and many of them. it's really worth a read, you'll find the parallels very real. ps i don't work for tim wu or his publisher |
|
|
|
so what are you afraid of? That the block chain management will eventually be in the hands of a single government or company, or abstractly speaking a single will? The short answer to that is that it will be practically impossible because in all likelihood you will end up having multiple competing fractions with different views on how to proceed with the currency, and they will have comparable mining (voting) power.
Which brings me to the point that the most likely attack vector will be source code control. Somebody has to maintain and develop the bitcoin protocol and unless there are as many efficient bitcoin node implementations as there are linux flavors I see danger.
Currently we have more or less a single client and a few developers which are working on refinements for the protocol. I'd like to see at least 100 developer teams world wide working on a consensus basis on what should go into the protocol and what not. Then it's up to the miners to decide which path to follow...
The funding infrastructure for bitcoin clients would be similar to the pool operators...
Well for now one good and efficient team has to suffice I guess.
i guess my "fears" are more in the realm of network control (which is also what this book is about)-- what is allowed, what is not allowed. there seem to be legions of people who are paid as full-time jobs, to try and disrupt free information flow. another thing, if you look at the direction that the hardware business is generally moving, it's all about signed binaries and centralized distribution, just like tim talks about in the book. if we continue along that path, what hardware is even going to run bitcoin? |
|
|
|
i appreciate what you're trying to do there, but i wouldn't have known that this was the same as stock-trading terminology. |
|
|
|
|
my tl;dr summary is probably sufficient, along with the amazon description
what it has to do with bitcoin: the internet may not be as open as we would like soon enough, and bitcoin may find itself co-opted one day. i guess i see this book as a good base of knowledge for how these kinds of things have historically taken place, and what we might do to prevent it from happening to these new technologies.
|
|
|
|
|
"wall", "bull", "rally" etc.
is there some kind of online dictionary for currency-trading language somewhere?
|
|
|
|
|
i'm not exclusively talking about the attitudes of older, more entrenched players here.
|
|
|
|
there is some speculation on bitcointalk, i can't think of specific threads, along with the silkroad forum.
some have speculated BS&T is related.
BS&T? |
|
|
|
In my view, I think it's entirely likely that many in the internet industry bought into Bitcoin last summer during the run-up, without doing much research first, and as a consequence convinced themselves that since the Bitcoin price didn't hold at $20, it is some kind of scam.
what is troubling is that even the most basic research would have revealed that it didn't make any sense to call it a scam. what i find even stranger is ignoring that bitcoin is a totally open source project: if any one of those folks had better ideas they could easily fork and apply. so maybe i should reword my question in such a way: "is the internet industry opposed to totally decentralized, not-corporate-controlled cryptographic currencies?" My other main theory is that those in the internet industry tend to be the type who think they understand how the world works. For the most part, this is true. But, when it comes to money, most of them haven't the slightest clue. Their worldview is heavily-invested in the notion that the global economy is an even playing field, fairly regulated by governments, and that currencies are backed by everyone working hard and paying their fair share in taxes. So they intuitively reject the idea of private money, and currency speculation, as being against their interests or somehow "cheating". Even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, most of them will maintain their faith in government-backed currency for the simple fact that they are so heavily invested in it.
i would agree, though i really don't know enough of such people at high levels to know for sure. out of curiosity what makes you think that "their" understanding of how the world works is for the most part true? It's unfortunate, but from what I've witnessed over the last dozen years or so is that the "internet industry" is no longer primarily composed of innovators. It is filled with authoritarian "yes-men" who are over-paid for doing relatively menial work.
this mirrors what unfortunately is becoming my view as well. but i really hope that view is merely a misunderstanding, which is actually the point of my original post. it begins to feel like some kind of strange conspiracy. one other thought: do you think the anonymity of the creation of bitcoin irks these folks? is that gesture itself somehow damaging to the ego of the internet entrepreneur, to have something like this built and no one wanting to take credit for it? certainly, at least, it goes against the grain... |
|
|
|
|
i guess not, but jacob seems to be no fool so i assumed it would at least have been revealed (what he was talking about)
|
|
|
|
I put screenshots of the main relevant pages here: Do-It-Yourself Money
"I AM SATOSHI NAKAMOTO": emblazoned on an increasingly popular T-shirt, these words celebrate the enigma of a man who made his own money. In 2011, bitcoin, the digital currency he created, briefly soared in value in a way that made gold's rise look pedestrian.
ps, who is making and selling those tees? :-) i am the one who came up with that slogan last year. |
|
|
|
|
sorry to resurrect a dead thread, but did anything ever come of this?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
