|
I would suggest reading about Bitcoin for 3-4 days (in your spare time obviously) at least, before making a decision.
It's more profitable to buy Bitcoins if you are betting on the exchange rate going up.
It's less risky to build a mining rig if you are betting on the exchange rate going up. (You have the hardware to sell if Bitcoins are worth 0 in the future)
The cheapest mining rig that can achieve the fastest hash rate is the best. This is usually one that you build yourself. If you already have a computer with pcie slots, it's possible to add a new video card (AMD) and mine with your existing hardware.
Again, I suggest you read, read, and read some more before you make any decisions.
|
|
|
|
How is it that discussion about a worldwide digital hard currency revolves exclusively around the good old United States of America?
It isn't obvious? The U.S.A. has the biggest guns. |
|
|
|
I feel like it's definitely going to go up and up at least for a short while-- but there's always the possiblity of a crash, one that the bitcoin might not survive. I'm pretty confident that even if the bitcoin currency itself goes under, eventually a stronger version of the same idea would take it's place and succeed. It's just got too much going for it to ever just fade away.
The only thing I see that can destroy the value of Bitcoin is something that undermines the security of the actual Bitcoin network, which is why I mine. It's properties make it too damn useful for too many people otherwise. It can survive a speculative crash. I don't think it can survive a technical flaw. |
|
|
|
is there a better practical alternative of introducing new currency without this injustice inherently build into it?
Promoting fingernails, hair, and skin as money? That was a joke, but my point is that you don't get money for simply existing, you have to do something that other people value in order to earn it. The original adopters (miners) of Bitcoin were doing something, securing the network when it was brand new, regardless of how valuable other people think it is. Who has the right to come along and say, "Hey, give me some of your labor", simply because they feel that past labor shouldn't have as much value as it currently does? |
|
|
|
but of course, i'm not commenting on this case or giving tax advice!
Understood.  Thanks for the reply. I look forward to seeing exactly how it all plays out. |
|
|
|
without commenting on this particular case, much of what people are saying about united states taxes in bitcoin-forum discussions is wrong. in the united states, you owe income taxes on property you acquire from any source (except gifts and a small number of other exclusions). you don't get to wait until you convert it into cash. people who say that are confusing capital-gain-realization rules for income rules. for example, if you find treasure in your backyard, you have taxable income. if you mine gold, you have taxable income, unless there are special mining laws that tax it differently. if you install linux for someone and they pay you in sdram, you have taxable income. taxes are computed at the fair market value (in dollars) at the time you acquire the property. you don't have to sell it in any of these cases to have federal income tax. see http://www.irs.gov/publications/p17/ch12.htmlstates in the us often have transfer taxes for business sales, and the transfer taxes may depend on the fair market value of the assets. update: to be clear, i'm not commenting on this case or saying that anyone said anything wrong here. i just wanted to provide general information to correct what i've perceived as a general mistake in forum discussions. if i had to guess about this particular case, i'd think it's possible someone does owe taxes on the mining 'income' regardless of sale, based on the value when it was mined. i don't know if it's the buyer or the seller of the business, and i agree that it's all probably a grey area. Aside from the case, I'm curious. Do I owe taxes on the things I create? For example. I buy a saw (pay tax on that), and buy some wood (pay tax on that). I use the tool and the material to create a chair. Do I owe tax on the chair, or only if I sell the chair? How would my example compare to mining Bitcoins? I buy hardware (pay tax on that), and internet service (pay tax on that). I download an open source program (no tax?). I use my hardware, internet connection, and the program to find the next block in the chain and I reward myself 50 BTC for doing it. Do I owe taxes on the BTC, or only if I sell them? Do BTC equate to the chair or have I made some error? |
|
|
|
I agree, I too want a monetary revolution. But this just stinks of greed, and the model is flawed due to the initial unbalanced sharing of wealth. As a principle, I will not buy any BitTulips
This is my concern too. It is often explained here as high profit associated with high initial risk taken by early adopters, but somehow I don't buy it. It like this. Some smart fellow invented the wheel. It allowed some dude to do more work with less energy. He had a huge advantage over everyone else who was still dragging carcasses, sticks, and whatnot around using barrows (wheelbarrow without a wheel). A few of the people around him see the benefit of the wheel. They start using it. They start telling their friends. The people on the other side of the world are the last to hear about this fantastic new invention: the wheel. Now, do the early adopters of the wheel have an advantage over the people on the other side of the planet who haven't heard about it yet? Yes. Did that make the wheel a poor tool? No! (In fact, we still use it today) Is it unfair that the people who started using the wheel first had an advantage over the people on the other side of the planet? Maybe, but that's life. Bitcoin isn't going to stop being useful because the people who saw it's usefulness first might profit from being first. Those who choose to boycott Bitcoin for these reasons will simply have to continue life without having the advantages of this particular useful tool. Time will tell if this becomes a disadvantage for them or not. |
|
|
|
5870 at very least
Cheap 5850s make great mining cards. |
|
|
|
|
Simple answer: It secures the network.
|
|
|
|
|
Are you preemptively organizing this petition, for when Bitcoins are outlawed, just for fun?
|
|
|
|
|
Cash: Where do you live?
Paypal: Beware of frozen accounts.
Credit card: I'm not certain.
Also, perhaps you should try the "Marketplace" instead of "Bitcoin Discussion".
|
|
|
|
|
How would you like to buy them? We can move forward from there.
|
|
|
|
yes, more reading than posting would be a good rule for everyone, wouldn't it? Indeed. and surely everyone posts only in certain discussions. i wasn't aware i had a common 'theme', but i haven't thought much about it. i've posted in some technical discussions, some economic ones, and some frivolous ones. how many more could i have done? the pigeonhole principle would shortly get in the way! Ahh, it wasn't the location of your posts that lead me to such a conclusion, it was the content. maybe we need some wordsworth in this discussion:
The world is too much with us; late and soon,
Getting and spending, we lay waste our powers;—
Little we see in Nature that is ours;
We have given our hearts away, a sordid boon!
Very nice. My heart yearns to be free; Alas, it can never be. |
|
|
|
you mean me personally? not much yet. this is my tenth post!
I don't mean the generic you. Your posts suggest more reading than posting, and you only post in certain discussions. Also, your posts have a common theme. Do you agree? |
|
|
|
I'm not in support of caging children, or murdering the parents.
Putting a child in a cage long enough to result in the child eating it's own skin in an attempt to survive is enough criminal negligence to require complete removal from society, imo. At this point the parents have clearly expressed their ability to initiate force against others and should have no expectation of gentle treatment at the hands of others. |
|
|
|
Wouldn't it be easiest, at the moment, to have accounts and balances at each exchange. Then if you saw an opportunity, you could take it without waiting for transfers.
Yes, this is the way. It takes bitcoins to make bitcoins Have ready money in multiple spots and buy the underpriced coins, move them to the better market and sell them. It will also in the end help regulate price. You would have to get lucky enough for blocks to be generated fast enough before the price changed. What do you mean? According to your first post, "Suppose on Bitcoin exchange A, you can sell your BTC for $5.50, but on Bitcoin exchange B, you can buy BTC for $5.30 each. So you buy up all the BTC you can on exchange B, transfer them to exchange A and sell them all for instant profit." If you already have balances at exchange A and exchange B, you can simply buy the BTC at exchange B and sell your BTC at exchange B at practically the same time. You profit without having to transfer. The only problem is you have to hold balances of BTC and other currencies at the exchanges. |
|
|
|
the psychological papers have already been written. the (nonscientific but still interesting) classic is of course http://www.amazon.com/Extraordinary-Popular-Delusions-Madness-Crowds/dp/051788433X. i don't mean that reference to suggest that everyone using bitcoin is deluded, but you might consider whether obsession is rational and what opportunity costs you incur as a result. the public is inclined to be less obsessive than the early adopters, of course. but i agree that the technology is fascinating. the sociopolitical dynamics of the phenomenon are interesting as well, particularly the marketing of the technology by 'satoshi' as libertarian (which, when you review his original messages on the cypherpunks mailing list, was intentional and strategic). that could have gone very differently and was managed very well in order to appeal to one group of people who could serve as early adopters. I wonder what opportunity costs you incur as a result of posting on this forum. |
|
|
|
We human beings create morals, rights, and ethic. Our morals and conception of ethic originated from our evolutionary origin and evolve through culture. There's a reason we evolved this way, but sometime moral concepts become obsolete in our current environment.
Indeed, we should try to "trim the fat" as often as possible. |
|
|
|
I would defend your daughter, but again, not because I felt responsibility to do so, but because I'm sensitive to child abuse so I would feel like shit for a long time if I didn't do anything. On the other hand, if I saw a beggar getting stabbed by 5 guys I would probably not defend him because the risk of getting owned myself is high and so it wouldn't be worthwhile saving someone I don't really care about.
I would defend others not because I felt a responsibility to do so, but because I respect life. Anyway, thanks for the conversation. I think we agree in many places and have a few key differences. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
