Radio waves could work, but let's assume no wireless communication...
Bitcoin could probably survive without internet per-se, but there would still have to be a Bitcoin network. Perhaps people could print out signed transactions and deliver or mail them to their local node, which would exchange with some other nodes (either on paper of digital media such as SD cards). Each region/nation could have a "supernode" clearing-houses which would receive local transactions and send them to foreign supernodes (maybe via telegraph cables? If we are generous to ourselves) and vice-versa in order to speed the regular node-to-node propagation.
(*Sigh*, when I started this post I didn't realize how ridiculous this would sound)
I have little idea how mining would work because I don't know enough about how it works now, but presumably blocks could be distributed by the same methods, although mining might have to be done by super-nodes exclusively.
In that situation, I'd say paper currency is probably better, BUT I would like to see the look on my face when I get a letter in the snail-mail letting me know that "You've received a Bitcoin payment for 125 mBTC!" or "Your payment of 125 mBTC to 1CBNHbNNJ4C3dTELRJq312hXFwUqxg7bnm has been confirmed!"
A letter in the mail would not allow you to know if the TX was actually confirmed, nor would it allow you to check for double spends and reject the TX if your letter is a double spend. You'd get a letter several days later letting you know that "Your payment of 125 m BTC to 1CBNHbNNJ4C3dTELRJq312hXFwUqxg7bnm has been confirmed!"  Who would send this letter? I can't imagine anyone paying for anything close to this kind of service without there being some kind of central authority. Additionally a letter in the mail will cost at least 34 cents while most transactions today cost 5 cents making it at the very minimum 7 times as expensive to send a TX then with "todays" bitcoin. |
|
|
|
Bitpay has make the process easy for any web store to accept bitcoin with no fee.
The day of paypal and credit card domination are over.
We still need to get consumers to understand the benefits of using bitcoin. We do not need bitpay to charge 0% fee to merchants for bitcoin to have a cost advantage over credit cards and paypal. Even with the fee being the same as a credit card bitcoin will have an advantage due to the lack of fraud and chargebacks. You're right. The cost of chargeback/fraud would be so much lower. This is exactly why more merchants should accept bitcoin for payment. Stores could charge several percent less then the cost of accepting credit cards and still end up on top. It is more or less impossible to impose fraud on merchants that accept bitcoin and requiring confirmed transactions (at least with the average size of transactions today). |
|
|
|
At a restaurant you trade money against a good meal. Wealth just got created.
You valued your money less than the meal, and the cook valued the meal less than the money. The sum of the difference of valuation is wealth.
Not all trade is equal. Most of the time there is a power relationship where the strong exploits the weak. An example is sweatshops. People who need jobs are willing to allow themselves to be exploited because they need money. This was common in 19th/ early 20th century before existence of labor unions Labor unions were necessary a long time ago but are useless today, as they are only good for enriching themselves and the politicians they support. There are enough employment laws today that will protect workers from these kinds of abuses. Additionally workers are educated enough to be able to stand up to these kinds of abuses. |
|
|
|
|
There was an article in the WSJ (among other places) that highlighted a sale of property in Lake Tahoe for $1.6 million that was paid for in bitcoin. I believe that the seller had used bitpay that gave the buyer 15 minutes to pay for the invoice once all the paperwork was finalized so the seller could receive the proceeds in fiat.
|
|
|
|
I believe that the blockchain breaks the privacy laws. Do you agree?
If bitcointalk.org does not violate privacy laws by publishing your comments, the blockchain does not violate privacy laws by publishing your transaction.  This actually is a very good point, and a good way of looking at it. When you broadcast a transaction you are publicly broadcasting your TX for anyone and everyone to see. Thanks! If you are really looking for privacy, there are so many other options for you to explore. Bitcoin really does give you a sufficient amount of privacy for the "average joe" it is just that every transaction is public (this is the OP's concern). For most people, it is very difficult to link your identity to any specific transaction, and any one of your transactions to another one of your transactions (if you use change addresses properly). True. There are efforts one has to take to ensure that one's online identity is not revealed. This is one of the first things that we learn while reading about bitcoin. I think as long as the "average" user of bitcoin does not do things that are illegal nor reckless then there is little chance that his identity will be revealed as few people would have the interest to do so. Even though all of his transactions are public, there would be very few people that would want to dox one random person out of millions of people. |
|
|
|
The question is, why would you want a security question? They're notorious for being easy points of attack if someone guesses your answer.
It really is a bad idea to have a security set. Whatever you to be the answer of the security question will be the defacto password to your account, as with it someone could reset your password then change the recovery email and security question. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin has the potential to be one of the biggest challenges governments face over the control of their economies. Central bankers already know it. As digital currency displaces paper money governments power to create inflation and set interest rates will exponentially diminish.
Quantitative Easing will accelerate paper money's decline and the bailing out of fiat bankers will be one for the history books. A better world?
If this is true then I'm wondering if their should be multiple Bitcoins to help speed up the process. Or is having one main coin(like we do right now), the best bet for this stage of overall crypto currency adoption. I personally think multiple competing coins is a healthy environment until we find a superior coin or alternative. IMO having multiple coins would likely slow the process as no one will know which one will be successful so they will not buy and use it. I agree, with there being one coin that is clearly going to be successful more people will be willing to invest/buy into bitcoin. If, on the other hand there are multiple cryptos then it will be less obvious which one(s) will survive over the long term and consumers will be less willing to invest. |
|
|
|
This is absolutely correct. Bitcoin is not a currency, instead Bitcoin is a form of money. They are different. I think bitcoin is on it's way to becoming a currency. Once it's price starts to be much more stable it will be a better store of value. Once it would be generally accepted that bitcoin is a stable store of value then it would generally be considered to be a currency. |
|
|
|
- Shave the kid's head
- Tattoo a private key on his skull.
- When the hair grows back the private key will be hidden
- Send btc to corresponding address
- When he grows old and looses his hair he'll discover the btc. Nice retirement nest egg for him.
I think some people would consider this to be cruel to the child (it would really be too young to consent and understand getting a tattoo like this). I also don't think that a tattoo artiest can make a tattoo in enough detail to be able to make a QR tattoo of a private key. Pretty sure he is joking. I think some people may be serious about doing this type of thing. A few people have gotten their very young children tattoos and have been arrested for child abuse or similar charges. |
|
|
|
I don't think it's on the decline, but it's use for legit stuff is on the rise so overshadows the bad stuff.
I think if anything using bitcoin for illegal purposes (like buying drugs online) is on the rise over the medium term. Ever since Ross got arrested, many more people have discovered that it is possible to do this and have started to do so. I think if anything, the FBI actually made the market and potential for profits of drug dealers on the "deep web" much bigger by arresting Ross and shutting down Silk Road 1. |
|
|
|
Mining would be a waste of energy on mars.
Maybe the Mars population will have such powerful computers that mining will be pointless and won't exist anymore. That's kinda what I'm hoping. Or at least we have a crypto that doesn't depend on mining very much. We can avoid the evil miners who invested in big powerful rigs and are using it to dominate the computing power behind any cryptocurrency we end up using on Mars. Though maybe it's just that I have enough of an evil genius in me to think of doing that. Bwahaha, right? The miners are what secure the network. What really needs to happen is the TX volume gets to be high enough so that TX fees are high enough so that miners will need to spend enough on their miners so even a deep pocketed entity would not effectively be able to attack the network. |
|
|
|
what are you saying is BS?
Everything that he said is 100% bullshit. I did the research and he is pulling stuff out of his ass. What did you find? According to wikipedia, 143 is the largest number ever factored by a quantum machine. To me, that counts pretty much as "zero results". Wikipedia is not a reliable source as anyone can change a wikipedia article. I would say that the largest number ever factored by a quantum computer is much larger then 143, likely millions of times larger. Most personal computers/laptop could likely factor much larger numbers. |
|
|
|
@ OP , why would anyone want to introduce bitcoins to a child, thats the same thing like introducing them to a stock market..
This is true today, but hopefully at a later time bitcoin will be more of a mainstream method of payment that many people use more efficiently then fiat based money. |
|
|
|
Sorry, but I'm a dirty hodler. I have every intention of spending my coinage, but not until they get up to $1000, or at least somewhere near there. I'm wanting to buy a sweet new hi-fi with my btc. I'm hoping Richer Sounds will accept them at some point too as I'd love to give them my coins.
Why would you not spend/sell them the last time bitcoin got to the 1k/1.2k level last fall? I personally think the best thing to do with your coins is to spend them when you can, especially when you can get a discount for using bitcoin, then purchase the retail/non-discount amount of bitcoin via an exchange. Over time the amount of total bitcoin you have will grow and you will reward companies for accepting bitcoin. |
|
|
|
Multisig paper wallet would be safest in my opinion. Then store multiple copies in separate safety deposit boxes  The police/district attorney could easily get warrants to search safe deposit boxes that you own, and the chances of them doing this to your boxes would be much greater if you are charged with a more serious crime. I think whatever method you use, you must be able to access your funds using only your head and nothing more then your head. |
|
|
|
Why does it even matter? Who cares?
So what if he is dead? So what if he is still alive?
Who cares if it was created by a govt organization?
Bitcoin has value and you spend it. end of story.
How would it affect any of you or even the market if he actually was dead? Or it wasn't who everyone thought it was.
Would you quit using it if you found out it was something other than what you thought?
A lot of people are very interested in the whereabouts of satoshi. Some people have spent weeks and months looking at his transactions and where the coins subsequently went. I personally think the chances of him being killed are less then the average citizen being killed as he is very smart and can avoid many dangerous types of situations that end up killing people. |
|
|
|
I got my trezor a couple days ago, and just had the time to set it up last night.
Once you figure it out, it is pretty easy to use. The ease of use is about equal to blockchain.info.
Blockchain.info is still better to use on the go though because if you want to send money from your trezor (and you are not at your computer), you have to install the browser plugin. Many public computers will not allow you to do this (by default), and many of your friends may not want you installing things on their computer.
I am a little concerned about holding a significant amount of BTC on the Trezor and then having a hardware failure, as up until this point, Wallet32 is the only wallet that you are able to restore your coins to (without purchasing another Trezor).
IMO, if you are thinking about buying a Trezor, you should consider buying 2, in case on of them fails in the future.
Electrum and armory will soon support the backup seed. Also Blockchain.info is looking into it! Blockchain.info does use something similar to a seed, it uses a group of words that is based on your password that will allow you to have access to your identifier and password. The problem with having a seed is that it is a weak link to possibly access your money. People generally will not protect their seed in the same ways they would protect their password so there is a greater chance that someone would be able to steal bitcoin via someone's seed. |
|
|
|
|
This is likely happening because bitcoin adoption by merchants is expanding. This will likely mean that the overall long term demand for bitcoin will likely rise (along with the long term price).
|
|
|
|
The FEC gave us a huge advantage in this. Politicians can accept bit coin which means we can reward or punish politicians based on their bit coin policy positions. Citizens United in an indirect way also made bit coin protected speech.
The ability to accept bitcoin does not affect people being able to hold politicians accountable for their bitcoin (or other) policy stance. If someone wanted to donate money to a politician's campaign they could simply sell their bitcoin for fiat and donate fiat to their campaign. |
|
|
|
|
You have one link to one possible connection to a "suspect" death, however this is far from concrete evidence. TBF members of the board of directors have been involved in shady business but I don't think any of this business is anywhere close to murder or murder for hire type business. That is "mobster" level crimes and IMO they are far from mobsters.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
