And if the sceptics had any doubts, the news that Rand Paul, the libertarian US politician now running for president, is willing to take campaign contributions in bitcoins tends to confirm their suspicions that it’s just a fantasy. I don't get that comment. Yeah I didn't get that either. It could mean something like "fantasy candidate (with no chance of winning) accepting fantasy currency (with no chance of becoming mainstream)", but that still wouldn't make much sense. |
|
|
|
Few days old article, but no one posted it due to forum being down: Happy Bitcoin Pizza Day!http://techcrunch.com/2015/05/22/happy-bitcoin-pizza-day/Every May 22 cyphernerds around the world celebrate Bitcoin Pizza Day, the day when early bitcoin enthusiast and programmer Laszlo Hanyecz offered 10,000 bitcoins – about $25 at that time – for two Papa John’s pizzas (pictured above). In 2010 he posted this to a bitcoin message board:
I’ll pay 10,000 bitcoins for a couple of pizzas.. like maybe 2 large ones so I have some left over for the next day. I like having left over pizza to nibble on later. You can make the pizza yourself and bring it to my house or order it for me from a delivery place, but what I’m aiming for is getting food delivered in exchange for bitcoins where I don’t have to order or prepare it myself, kind of like ordering a ‘breakfast platter’ at a hotel or something, they just bring you something to eat and you’re happy!If you’re interested please let me know and we can work out a dealThanks,
Laszlo
Those bitcoins would be worth $2,330,000 today.
... |
|
|
|
Lawsky’s Last Bitcoin Licensing Playhttp://www.pymnts.com/news/2015/lawskys-last-bitcoin-licensing-play/#.VWNRxcZ2UZwNew York is on the verge of getting new licensing rules governing commercial use of virtual currencies including bitcoin. As Benjamin M. Lawsky steps down next month as head of the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS), he will unveil a set of rules known colloquially as the BitLicense, The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday (May 21).
BitLicense traces its genesis to the end of 2013, and would govern how digital currency companies might be regulated in the state. There was a comment period in March. During that comment period, bitcoin firms, financial backers and other players stated they are concerned that the BitLicense, the first one of its kind, will serve as a harbinger for what is to follow in other states.
Industry participants worry the regulations could place stumbling blocks in the way of small tech companies or startups with limited access to funds and other resources.
...
|
|
|
|
North Carolina legislators consider law regulating commerce in virtual currencies like Bitcoinhttp://www.tribtown.com/view/story/e98c2af5d2eb43bea9d09c86e00e689b/NC--Virtual-CurrencyRALEIGH, North Carolina — Legislators in America's second-largest banking center are considering regulations for Bitcoin and other virtual currencies.
North Carolina's banking commissioner is seeking legislative authority to require that companies circulating digital IOUs meet consumer protection, anti-money laundering and other standards. Legislation passed the state House earlier this month and is pending in the Senate.
Though North Carolina State University's football team won last December's Bitcoin Bowl in St. Petersburg, Florida, the public's understanding of virtual currency is still in catch-up mode.
The online-only money allows users to swap cash for online funds using Internet exchanges, then store it in a wallet program on their computer. The program can transfer payments to a merchant or private party anywhere in the world, eliminating transaction fees and the need to provide bank or credit card information. There are dozens of decentralized currencies based on the bitcoin protocol like Litecoin, Auroracoin and Peercoin.
...
|
|
|
|
MIT aims to give bitcoin research, development a stable homehttp://www.betaboston.com/news/2015/05/25/mit-aims-to-give-bitcoin-research-development-a-stable-home/Bitcoin survived a wild youth marked by drug trafficking, money laundering, theft, bankruptcy, and political spats. Now, the digital currency is getting cleaned up and heading to grad school.
A fledgling project at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Media Lab is offering researchers and software developers a quiet home to work on bitcoin’s core technology, a computer science breakthrough that lets people trade money securely without paying a middleman.
Media Lab leaders hope that, by acting as a safe home for research and development, MIT can help the sprawling bitcoin software project shed its chaotic past and emerge as a more versatile technology platform.
If the idea works, bitcoin’s underlying technology — known as the blockchain — has a chance to become a new digital system that makes transferring money or signing a contract as cheap and simple as sending an e-mail.
...
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin really is useful. Just not in the way you thinkhttp://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/23/bitcoin-really-useful-not-in-way-you-thinkWhen the banking system went into meltdown in 2008, an intriguing glimpse of an alternative future appeared. On 31 October, an unknown cryptographer who went by the name of Satoshi Nakamoto launched what he described as “a new electronic cash system that’s fully peer to peer, with no trusted third party”. The name he assigned to this new currency was bitcoin.
Since then, the world has been divided into three camps: those who think that bitcoin must be a scam; those who think it’s one of the most interesting technological developments in decades; and (the vast majority) those who have no idea what the fuss is about.
I belong in the second camp, but I can see why others see it differently. Those of the scam persuasion, for example, see the absence of any central authority, the wild fluctuations in the value of bitcoins (they were worth more than $1,000 in November 2013, around $235 at the moment), the mysterious collapse of one of the big bitcoin exchanges, the hacking of some of the digital “wallets” in which people keep their bitcoins and so on. And if the sceptics had any doubts, the news that Rand Paul, the libertarian US politician now running for president, is willing to take campaign contributions in bitcoins tends to confirm their suspicions that it’s just a fantasy.
...
|
|
|
|
|
Everyone got the same email. Just change your passwords (+ security question) and you'll be fine.
Also, watch out for any possible fraud/malware emails coming to your associated email addresses.
|
|
|
|
HELLO
I DID NOT MAKE ANY DEALS JUST TO LET YOU KNOW MY ACCOUNT GOT HACKED I RECIEVED AN EMAIL MY INFO GOT CHANGED
Which account? Link to profile? What email are you talking about? |
|
|
|
Where can buy ethereum coins ?  Currently you can't. You have to wait for the launch, it should be on exchanges shortly after. |
|
|
|
The very small issue was that our css and javascript folder were showing the contents instead of showing a blank page to the public.
Since we're on the subject of critical bugs, I've spotted some grammar errors  Withdrawal tab: Withdrawal Bitcoins (change to "Bitcoins Withdrawal" or "Withdrawing Bitcoins"?)
You can withdrawal ("withdraw") Bitcoins from your BitcoinPoker.gg account by filling out and submitting the form below. For your protection, we manually approve all withdrawals. Withdrawals are normally approved within 2 hours but can sometimes take up to 12 hours.
Enter the Bitcoin address you would like to send your funds to and the amount (in chips) you would like to withdrawal ("withdraw"). Chips will automatically be converted into Bitcoins.
...
Minimum Withdrawal is 20 Chips (0.02 BTC). Do NOT withdrawal ("withdraw") fractional chips. I want nothing for this. |
|
|
|
|
Quick feedback.
I made my first small order at pesobang 4 days ago, it arrived today, much sooner than expected (free delivery). Well done.
|
|
|
|
Found new sig camp -------- Corona Signature Campaign ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1026177) Payment period: Weekly Minimum posts: 25min/week Payments: H/L 0.035 BTC / week, F/S 0.025 BTC week, M 0.012 BTC/week, J 0.0008 BTC / week Escrow: No --------- They pay in "Coronaz" not BTC, so probably don't belong here. Every rank has its own weekly reward. The payment will be made in Coronaz. Any reference to Bitcoin is symbolic and calculated according to the base value of 10,000 Coronaz per BTC. |
|
|
|
Silicon Valley banks on Bitcoin as a way to overtake Wall Street (video + article) http://finance.yahoo.com/news/silicon-valley-sees-bitcoin-as-its-way-to-overtake-wall-street-120920191.htmlIf you asked most people through history their biggest complaint about money, most would say they just don’t have enough of it.
But there have long been small factions dissatisfied with the dominant forms of money, which sought a more secure, private, efficient means of storing wealth and paying for things.
The digital currency Bitcoin emerged from these desires, enabled by pervasive access to the Internet and alarm over the failures of central banks and private financial institutions in the credit bust of the late 2000s.
...
|
|
|
|
For you partly, but mostly for other people who might drop in, and for myself. I don't have to explain everything trice to idiots. Either you take the pearls you get, or not. You seem to either someone who is extremely slow, or a troll. The troll to normal people ratio in this forum is close to 0.8, so there is a high probability of you being a troll. You discard 300 years of development in macro economics laid before you for a cheap scare that you picked up from a luddite, it seems to be burnt into your brain.
Don't explain anything 'trice' just do it once (if you cared to join this thread). Apart from being an idiot I must also be blind or have serious reading comprehension issues cause I'm yet to see any 'pearl' of your wisdom. So far you made a few posts trying to sound like a big boy, but the only thing you brought to the table is shaky argument (addressed multiple time in this thread) of '300 years of development' aka 'if something hasn't happened yet - it can never happen' belief. Inventions of cars/automated production lines/computers etc had overall positive effect, but only because human labour could be directed elsewhere. But we're not talking anymore about robots in the factory, we're talking about robots replacing intellectual, qualified labour, or even creative labour (artist). To dumb it down (and that's the 3rd time I present this argument to you, so far - no reply) ultimately if we're able to create human-like robot with better performance (both physical and intellectual/analytical) than human and consuming less energy - human work becomes entirely obsolete. There's no place to go anymore (maybe apart from some niche in prostitution etc). So you can either clearly address this and explain how your free-market mechanism will cope, or carry on with some vague bullshit or random insults (you still haven't call me a 'commie' you can use that). @pawel7777 think what he is saying is that poor people without work will just work for each other. If there are no regulations and government intervention and taxes, that could somehow work. I don't think it could. Or that it would even be a free market then. You can't have a free market with so unequal participants. (poor people working for each other and rich people with automation)
He wasn't very clear on what he tried to say, especially when my question was rather direct and simple. If so, the alternative economy wouldn't work for multiple reasons, not going to list them tho as they're irrelevant anyway. Even if you could successfully start alternative economy, it would very soon follow the same scenario (automation), but this time not within centuries, but rather within years, since the technology is already available. It has already been discussed here. |
|
|
|
Inform yourself.
Lol. Instant win of discussion.Why did you even bother to post in this thread? |
|
|
|
The free market laws are the sovereignty of individuals, freedom to choose, freedom to trade. It starts with understanding human action. Individuals will by their actions prefer one thing over another, this results in valuations in the market. This means that a factory owner will only automate if he thinks that will be profitable for himself. The workers will only work for him if they consider it advantagous for themselves. The customers will only buy from him if they find in advantagous for themselves. That goes for the automation supplier also, and all other economic activity. These are laws of the market. When people meet, they start to trade according to these laws. The prices in the market are signals to all actors what to do.
Involve violence, and the balances are distorted.
These are nice sounding words, nothing more. Can you draft some possible scenario how would that work in practice? Yes, consumers will choose cheaper and better quality goods from fully automated factories, producers/suppliers will choose cheaper and more reliable "workforce" - because that's more advantageous for them in the short term. Are you saying that people will reject technology (to some degree) to sacrifice low costs for the greater good (employment)? If so, that would mean that what guarantees the self-regulation of free market is... The Luddite movement (!?) |
|
|
|
Why is it not realistic ? tell me why, I am eager to learn. Why do you consider the "no job available" a natural law of nature ?
I used it to force you to show how 'buying a robot' by poor (who magically delivers food on your plate and pays the bills) could be placed in real-life scenario. But you're not very keen of defending your argument, are you? And nope, I've never heard anyone, who sees TU as a threat, claiming that's 'law of nature'. It may never happen and I hope it won't, but I see such possibility and all the signs (unprecedented progress in technology) points at it being a likely scenario. But I hear plenty of libertarians and alike claiming "it will never happen!" as if there was any 'law of nature' to prevent this (it's almost like atheist vs religion discussion). And that's understandable, if it happens, it will render their views beliefs as bullshit. Don't want to repeat all the arguments proving TU is a real threat etc. Just a quick one, if you can create a 'robot' (or other machine or software) which consumes less energy than human + is more effective - there's no reason to employ human. There will be no technological unemployment, that is by the law of the markets, but with the violence of government, supported by their willing slaves, anything can happen. ... With no arguments, that's a cute religious-like belief you got there. What's the free-market "law" that help you out-compete hypothetical robot which is more skilled than you, more efficient and needs less energy to keep going than yourself? Will you train your body not to need food/drink/sleep/shelter in order to lower your survival-only pay-rate? |
|
|
|
Why is it not realistic ? tell me why, I am eager to learn. Why do you consider the "no job available" a natural law of nature ?
I used it to force you to show how 'buying a robot' by poor (who magically delivers food on your plate and pays the bills) could be placed in real-life scenario. But you're not very keen of defending your argument, are you? And nope, I've never heard anyone, who sees TU as a threat, claiming that's 'law of nature'. It may never happen and I hope it won't, but I see such possibility and all the signs (unprecedented progress in technology) points at it being a likely scenario. But I hear plenty of libertarians and alike claiming "it will never happen!" as if there was any 'law of nature' to prevent this (it's almost like atheist vs religion discussion). And that's understandable, if it happens, it will render their views beliefs as bullshit. Don't want to repeat all the arguments proving TU is a real threat etc. Just a quick one, if you can create a 'robot' (or other machine or software) which consumes less energy than human + is more effective - there's no reason to employ human. |
|
|
|
I am libertarian, would be teenager, but sadly not anymore. Lets use a real example simulation, no theoretical bullshit. Imagine you're a customer service worker, with unemployed wife + kid + mortgage. You earn just enough to survive (pay the bills, get food, clothes, pay mortgage rate). One day you discover that you and your colleagues are replaced by piece of software.
What do you do? Go Find another job. If you say, there is no job, then you should ask yourself why is this the case and study it. What happened to the people who were copying book by hand before gutenberg ? I was hoping you'll explain how that's not a problem because: Why does the poor doesn't own a robot which will work for him ? So why does the poor not buy a robot, since his wage is higher than a robot ? Or this: No, the poors can provide services to each others as well and form their own economy Can you apply your 'solutions' to the real life scenario? Or does it only work in your head? Ps. In this scenario automation affected most of the sectors, so obvious solution of 'getting a new job' is not quite realistic option. Ps2. No offence intended with the 'teenager' thing, from my experience: people like to label themselves in their teenage years (I did), but develop more balanced and open-minded approach later on. You seemed to me to be very resistant to consider that your libertarian beliefs may simply not be true, so honestly assumed you're a teenager. |
|
|
|
Cześć wszystkim  Czesc! Witaj na forum. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
