Only 1 of those people can spend it at any given time. Like a bank account many people can have access. If they all tried to withdraw the balance of that account only the first successful attempt would be valid. So the actual owner of the money was the one who was able to use withdraw it.
Before the bitcoin is used any one of the holders has the potential to be the owner, but it the one that determines it's usage that is in fact the owner.
So it is more like quantum property, which exists in a state of ownership uncertainty until it is in fact spent. Either that or a far more simple explanation is that the private key is just information and the actual bitcoins, the property are the unspent outputs. Then where does ownership come in? If the property is the unspent outputs, then everybody with a copy of the blockchain has them. |
|
|
|
|
Daniel Pinchbeck is pretty cool.
|
|
|
|
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. Did you miss the LIBOR news? Have you not paid attention to the last 100 years of monetary policy? On Topic: I will quote myself from an earlier episode of OMG SLEEPING WITH THE ENEMY news: This is seriously awesome. I wonder how long the establishment will tolerate you leveraging their ancient and hard won infrastructure to beat them at their own corrupt game.
|
|
|
|
I don't pretend to know all the issues except for the issue I never got after paying for it 3 or 4 months ago
You should demand an apology and threaten to sue if you don't get one. After the apology/lawsuit, you should demand that you receive the issue and threaten to sue if you don't get it. After getting the magazine/lawsuit, you should demand psychological counselling services due to the overwhelming stress of the multiple lawsuits being forced upon you, or threaten to sue if you don't receive them. After getting the counselling/lawsuit... |
|
|
|
Why would you want bitcoin in a game? Isn't the point of games to escape the real world and all its entails? Bringing in real money seems very counter to that goal.
Any monetary system is a game system. It has arbitrary rules, arbitrary goals and arbitrary participation. |
|
|
|
|
Well, given the specification of the system, (16 bit words, very limited memory, limited access to reliable data storage, no actual networking capability that has been announced...), I doubt it would be possible to develop software that is actually compatible with bitcoin proper. But, perhaps an internal independent p2p cryptocurrency can be developed within the parameters of the system, adopted by the player base, which could then be easily traded for bitcoin.
I'm just surprised that no one is working on 10coin, is all I'm saying.
|
|
|
|
Here is another reason NEVER to form partnerships with other people.
That's sorta like saying "trust no one." Follow that rule religiously, and you will lead a barren, lonely life. Sure, some humans are fallible and will let you down. But other humans are wonderful and will boost you up. Bitcoin is based on the trust no one idea though. Better to trust many. |
|
|
|
Only 1 of those people can spend it at any given time. Like a bank account many people can have access. If they all tried to withdraw the balance of that account only the first successful attempt would be valid. So the actual owner of the money was the one who was able to use withdraw it.
Before the bitcoin is used any one of the holders has the potential to be the owner, but it the one that determines it's usage that is in fact the owner.
So it is more like quantum property, which exists in a state of ownership uncertainty until it is in fact spent. This is further complicated by the fact that a person can continuously create keys and accounts indefinitely and potentially gain access to unspent coins, without the original owners knowledge or detection, and not only that, but this could lead to irrevocable loss of the coins. Just as with all money/property, it is more of a hindrance than a help to the human species. |
|
|
|
Hmmm...tell someone you're sorry or go through an odious legal battle...
It's amazing that this is an actual choice someone has to make.
What a sick culture.
I'm just waiting for the "you say sorry first" episode of this soap opera. AKA the counter suit. |
|
|
|
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? |
|
|
|
|
But two or more people can have access to the same cryptographic elements that make up a bitcoin account/address. It loses rivalrousnessess then.
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmm...tell someone you're sorry or go through an odious legal battle...
It's amazing that this is an actual choice someone has to make.
What a sick culture.
|
|
|
|
|
An opinion is neither true nor false, and money/property is ultimately a shared opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
As with any money, it exists merely as an idea. Sometimes people attribute physical objects with this idea, but that does not fundamentally change the physical object. In bitcoin's case, the physical object is the organization of information, which is ultimately what any physical object is, but in this case it is nearly infinitely adaptable to any medium. The question of "intellectual property" is ultimately one of a society's willingness to impose force and violence to maintain the illusion of "property", itself an idea that we continue to labor under despite its many flaws and associated negative outcomes. Bitcoin's unique features render it nearly unclassifiable, due to its utter reliance on secrecy and cryptography. Once the cryptographic elements of a bitcoin account/address are destroyed or compromised, it is rendered practically useless to the original user. Either the account is nearly impossible to recover due to the computational effort required to re-discover the keys, or the account is now subject to another person's use, as anyone with the keys can control any bitcoins assigned to the account.
As a direct answer, bitcoin is just like everything else. It can be thought of as virtual property. It can be thought of as actual property. Ultimately it boils down to our ideas and definition of property in the first place. And anyone paying attention recognizes that property is not an idea in the best interests of a global society.
|
|
|
|
|
I think what's really needed is for the wife and the girlfriend to come on and discuss the issue. Women are better communicators than men.
|
|
|
|
|
Clearly the corporatocracy is at it again, stealing people's bitcoin related articles and clip art, embezzling large amounts of ink, all the while leaving the public magazineless.
#OccupyBitcoinMagazine
|
|
|
|
It is my understanding, based on what little information I have, that the transfer of ownership of Bitcoin Magazine has been done improperly and highly likely fraudulently (if the article about new ownership published on bitcoinmagazine.net is true). It might be potentially classed as fraudulent because no proper shareholder vote was done and they have attempted to conceal this matter from at least some shareholders. It is my understanding that Mihai Alisie as sole director of the company acting dishonestly and in conspiracy with a number of third parties has potentially fraudulently transferred assets from other shareholders (the company) to himself and his co-conspirators without shareholder vote being properly done.
I own a significant amount of shares in Bittalk Media Ltd and I am not aware about any shareholder votes related to any significant property transactions nor have I received any consideration for any property of the company or for my shares. The third parties involved in this transaction ought to have known that they are very likely dishonestly assisted in director's breach of fiduciary duty and therefore very likely will be liable themselves. Not to mention that annual employment contracts received by some look too much like bribes.
It also appears that Mihai Alisie has transferred ownership of domain bitcoinmagazine.com to himself (see whois) while the domain was bought by him acting in capacity of director of the company, following instructions of myself (Managing Director of the company at the time) and using company money that were specifically transferred to him for purpose of purchasing the domain. He also claimed in private conversations that that domain somehow belongs to him and that he himself somehow owns a lot of "intellectual property" which rightfully should have been owned by the company.
I will pursue this matter legally in due course.
I can't wait to read about this in the next issue. |
|
|
|
I hand out copies regularly as as evangelism tool.
Like i say: Not a currency. A Religion. Money is a religion. |
|
|
|
For the immediate reaction (temporary IRC ban), the explanation was simple: it was off-topic, potentially inflammatory crap we specifically do not want in #bitcoin-dev. People occasionally attempt to get on IRC and try to troll the devs into saying something publicly that fits their agenda. After repeated warnings... boot.
No one was trying to get you to say anything. You inserted yourself into the conversation, from what the logs indicate. How was this person trolling when pursuing relevant discussion without asking you for any involvement or statement at all? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
