|
Franzl: >_> I abhor PHP, so I can't help you there, but some day (Completely overwhelmed with projects right now, but some day...) we might write the .net library.
|
|
|
|
Yes. Bitcoin.  Gold was desired due to it's luster. In this instance, it was a good in a barter economy. Money for getting a taxpayer to leave you alone is exactly that: used to exchange for the "service" of the taxpayer going away. The only other instance I can think of where people would want money surely for the sake of having money would be confederate dollars, because they assosciate themselves with the south (a weird form of patriotism or something)... And even most of THOSE people I've talked to are convinced that "the confederate dollars comin back, and when it does, i'll be ready." Hence, they value it because they have confidence that one day they'll be able to trade said money in for something else of value. |
|
|
|
Honestly it would be better to try a different model entirely. For one, there is a lot of criticism about bitcoin's overall structure - even ignoring the hard deflationary nature of them.
I have never believed and never will (until proved wrong by reality) that you can create actual value by bit-twiddling numbers in mysterious ways. But what bitcoin style twiddling does offer, and what you can do, I think is to implement decentralised clearing houses for some other substance of actual value. that capability is worth its weight in gold , though I guess it too may prove impossible at the margin (hope not though) *shrug* Money is just a placeholder for goods. Swapping money for goods/services is done on the premise that you'll later be able to swap said money for your own goods/services. Money in itself never has any value. I could pick up a seashell, and as long as you have confidence that you'll be able to trade that seashell to someone else for something of equal value to what you trade me, regardless of if it's a single microgram of gold or a jetplane, then that seashell is money. It's backed by confidence. Therefore, money is nothing BUT twiddling numbers (and paper/coins, in a more archaic sense) in mysterious ways. |
|
|
|
|
davidonpda: Not only that, but have the javascript running low level bitcoin generation and sending the bitcoins to you... Then, you're getting money from the people who pay, AND the people who play for free.
|
|
|
|
Every 2014 blocks the difficulty is automatically adjusted so that at the average hashing speed of the last 2014 blocks it will take 2 weeks to create the next 2014 blocks.
What this means is that if you load 1000x more computing power into hashing than the rest of us combined you will get nearly all of the remaining 2014 coins until the reset, but then even at your phenomenal speed the next 2014 will take you 2 weeks. Only about 2 blocks will be generated by other people, but you won't generate anymore than all of the blocks. Now if you could increase your power 1000x every 2014 blocks for a long time then yes you could get a lot of blocks. You are still going to run into the halving of coin awards and are absolutely maxed at getting the rest of the coins that will ever be created, about 17.5M more.
Anyway, the point is that if you hold 21 BTC you will never have fewer than 1 millionth of the coins, no matter how fast your computing is or how fast your computing speed increases.
2016. Other than that, yea. |
|
|
|
|
I was just thinking about an MMORPG (I know it was mentioned elsewhere, but I was further elaborating on it in my mind) based around a bitcoin-like economy (not connected to the actual economy, so as not to screw with things). It would take some of the load off the server, allowing people to transfer coins peer to peer. The coin generation could just be incorporated into your next loot or quest reward or something.
|
|
|
|
|
Right, but changing it NOW, regardless of if we use it would still require the users to upgrade ("breaking" change, as it's called), because now the numbers would be stored with arbitrary-precision data format, instead of "regular long" format. Granted, now's the time to do it if we are, while the community is relatively small, but it'd still be considered breaking.
|
|
|
|
|
Anyone want to buy puns for bitcoins?
1 bitcoin for a high quality, sure-to-make-you-groan pun, hand crafted specifically for you.
2 bitcoins for a limerick.
5 bitcoins will get you a pun or limerick crafted specifically around a topic or person of your hearts desire.
If I can't do it within 24 hours, I'll refund your bitcoins!
For the next 8 hours my static IP will be 65.9.208.150, just send me your chosen price, a refund address, and optionally a topic for your pun/limerick. If the IP will not go through, send me a private message on the forum and I'll craft an address for you to send them to.
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously I wouldn't request money until services had been rendered. =P Also, I've got my plateful with 4 other projects, so it's low on the priority list, but if no ones stepped up before then, I'll take a crack at it.
|
|
|
|
|
Ah ok.
Proposed revision: Once you open up the question to the public, they vote on the prediction, as well on a 1 to 10 scale of subjectivity. This is then averaged, and determines the "percentage split" between how the funds are split up majority/minority somehow. So an extremely subjective question, the judges aren't penalized for their answer as much, because it could have gone either way.
|
|
|
|
|
Babylon: Not true. The software stores them in the base bitcoin value. All transactions are done with this value stored on disk. However, the client could display "10 nanocoins" when really it means ".00000001 bitcoins". It's up to the client to do the conversion behind that.
However, to provide additional levels of divisibility, you'd need a structure for arbitrary position. This would most likely be a breaking change, but it would just mean that everyone needs to update the client. The old bitcoins could still be converted to the new value system, as long as the new clients still "understood" how the old clients dealt with things.
|
|
|
|
What would the judges do?  |
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure I understand the concepts at play here, but if you give me detailed specifications on what it should do, I could probably code it for you ( for a small bitcoin fee, of course =) ).
|
|
|
|
|
I'm willing to help with any bitcoin related websites for super duper cheap ( paid in bitcoins of course =) ) to help stimulate the economy.
|
|
|
|
|
Haha, Babylon: That's very easy to judge, but different people will come up with different answers, and still consider it an "easy" choice. =P
|
|
|
|
^.^ Bit out of order there. |
|
|
|
2. That the merchant does insufficient checking, considering the large value of the transaction.
That will cause ANYONE to be able to invalidate the currency, depending on the extent to which the merchant does insufficient checking. It'd the the equivalent of me drawing a crude approximation of the dollar bill with crayon, and the cashier being so lazy he/she doesn't notice. =P |
|
|
|
|
First thought: "Bum Bot" invokes the completely wrong image for what your site is. =P
|
|
|
|
|
bdonlan: Actually, I was trying to figure out how to do that very thing, put a coin in "first come first serve" mode, for transfer onto a flash drive or something. Can you post more detailed information on how You'd go about doing that?
|
|
|
|
No, not infinitely divisible but to destroy every single BitCoin would be like trying to count every atom in this planet, the number is so high that you would have to destroy every BitCoin simultaneously because a single Bit Coin can still be divided another 1 million times if need be.
That still is a pretty hard limit. I would even go so far as to say "famous last words" as the folks who came up with IPv4 had to deal with the exhaustion of the address space (about 4 billion IP addresses). Unfortunately the current demand world-wide is about 15-20 billion at the moment, and no end in sight about how many more may eventually be needed, hence IPv6. Minor note: Demand isn't 15-20 billion. There's never been a request to IANA that met it's predefined guidelines that got denied, and there's still a couple subnets left. We've got a bit to grow to still hit the hard limit of IPv4. Still, your point is valid, just felt like throwing that out there. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
