i just love it when these talking heads in the media make these blankett statements.
1. bitcoin begins togo mainstream
2. in an unrelated event, the US economy begins to descend into the abyss taking the US dollar with it
3. bitcoin explodes
4. government tries to intervene in digital currency
5. mass riots, protest, violence and revolt
If they dont stop it before #2, they will never stop it. and i say they cant!
oh they could stop if they wanted. it would just mean that they would have to go get jobs. |
|
|
|
I sometimes post on bitcoin related youtube videos that i give out small amounts of bitcoin for free. This guy was one of the people who responded back to ask for a few bits. So when i get a response back i usually check out their videos see what kind of stuff they have produced. This one just so happed to be EPIC so i thought i would share. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46QX2hTGwPsand here is his bitcoin address if anyone wants to tip. 1M5xaseDEZvRz5SbMp7axTzQsFmacM2hmk |
|
|
|
|
ive seen a lot of these things and i have to say this one is particularly well done. it really does seem like the words match up with the gibberish.
|
|
|
|
rofl thankyou for my lol of the day. the government is going to be thoughtful, nimble and sensible and non stifling. Maybe while they are at it they can train some elegant, graceful, fleet-footed, nimble, dainty, dancing hippopotami.  |
|
|
|
|
we have been here before. just auction bitmit on the front page of bitmit. the person who pays the most will be the person who believes he can get the most value out of it so it will then be relocated to its highest value application. this is how a market economy works. someone who believes they can pay $50,000 for bitmit and still make a profit is someone who has big plans, someone who has great ideas for how to take bitmit to great places. if that person is wrong than it will be sold again and again until someone buys it who isn't wrong.
please tosaki. do this right, it doesn't matter who runs it so long as the person who runs it proves that he believes that it is as valuable as we believe it is. please please please auction it off to the highest bidder.
to anyone else who is reading this, do what you can to communicate this message to tosaki.
|
|
|
|
|
at this rate, probably later this afternoon...
|
|
|
|
google was all about cooperating with the nas when it was profitable. thankyou edward snowden so much for making it no longer a profitable proposition |
|
|
|
|
sure bitcoin will someday return to the value it started with. i think everyone knows this. even if its 1000 years in the future SOME new crypto will eventually emerge that makes bitcoin look like childs play by comparison but so what? where is this rule that says that for something to not be a bubble it must retain its value for all of eternity? hell that would make everything a bubble since the universe will eventually run out of energy and everything will die. the purpose of bitcoin is to facilitate transactions, it has already done this many many many times, it is already a success.
|
|
|
|
|
words are like living organisms. they are born and they die but also they evolve and change. btr to learn how to adapt yourself rather than try to fight this process.
|
|
|
|
|
bitchick: why do you believe in some things that have no evidence to support them but not other things that have no evidence to support them? why do you believe god exists but not care bears?
|
|
|
|
|
thanks for clearing that up maaku.
*tangent warning* blind signatures are amazing. some people talk about how the future will be saved from tyranny through peaceful parenting. others through the political system. some through revolution. but my money is on the efforts of people like yourself and gmaxwell. idk if you ever stop to think about this, but just the hand full of you guys working on these sorts of technologies might be responsible for saving the entire human species from extinction or worse. i know that sounds dramatic but i really think its hard to overstate the importance of this sort of research.
|
|
|
|
Anon136, there is no need to reduce the set of facilitators in any way, even by distributed consensus. But miners could certainly publish lists of perceived reliable facilitators in their blocks, helping others to find them. There's a proposal along these lines for peer lists that is currently circulating the development mailing list.
what if the majority of the facilitators were actually a single malicious actor using multiple ip exit nodes? have you devised a mechanism for preventing him from being able to deduce information about transactions in this manner? or have you devised an alternative mechanism for insuring that no such actor is ever able to gain that much influence? |
|
|
|
I think there is a flaw in the blind signing solution. The client doesn't know how many other genuine participants have joined in a transaction so if the server was malicious it could lie, add its own outputs, and force one participant per transaction. With only one genuine participant in the transaction even if the outputs are blind signed it simple to connect the correct inputs.
That's why you use multiple facilitators, and act as act as facilitator yourself 1/N of the time. The implementation I'm working on is fully p2p. That's no better than the two-party case though - you have no idea if anyone else in the p2p network, facilitator or not, is real or part of a sybil attack, and it's still going to be slower to complete a transaction than the two-party alternative. how did we solve this with bitcoin? you could solve it here the exact same way. have the facilitators be the 6 most recent miners to contribute new blocks to the blockchain. or atleast the 6 most recent who agree to provide the service. maaku if you read this also please tell me what you think. |
|
|
|
Trying out some pills for better memory..
do report back and let us know how it goes. i have a very bad memory so i could really use some magic memory pills |
|
|
|
|
i know i said that nothing was off topic here. well technically thats not true. there is one thing thats always off topic, that not even the title of my thread is able to absolve of its off-topic-full-ness. that one thing is of course, anything that firstassent says.
|
|
|
|
|
what happens if the facilitator is compromised?
|
|
|
|
|
0.2btc donated. please dont let us down.
|
|
|
|
|
how much bloat would ubiquitous use of this "trustless mixing" add to the blockchain?
|
|
|
|
|
also this thread should have a sticky imo.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
