|
It's the only way I download
|
|
|
|
|
why people don't post images with the names, now I have to google every single lady
|
|
|
|
Would just like to say that PD has been working great for me now, the chat feature has been stable and working wonderful! Great job guys!
You are one lucky guy, for me only problems...hope they will resolve their stuff soon |
|
|
|
|
Any news from dicebitcoin regarding this? Who invested another 500BTC in the site??? This is just wrong
|
|
|
|
This just happened :  maybe they also had reversed cheat for mateo? |
|
|
|
i dunno what to say.
i put borrowed money on the site. now gone?
|
|
|
|
|
Can you people stop advertising them! Remove those ads from your signatures, it's an insult for us who lost money
|
|
|
|
|
It is not an offline wallet (cold storage) if it was created on a computer connected to the internet.
|
|
|
|
Since users usually have to reveal their identity in order to receive services or goods, Bitcoin addresses cannot remain fully anonymous. For these reasons, Bitcoin addresses should only be used once and users must be careful not to disclose their addresses. That's going to be a LOT of email addresses to remember. The "dot-bit address" could be associated with a stealth address. http://sx.dyne.org/stealth.html |
|
|
|
|
Ja, det var en antagelse i det eksempelet.
Jeg er ikke helt uenig i de økonomiske argumentene dine, for det vil sannsynligvis bli én global hovedvaluta. Men jeg mener at at det er flere faktorer som spiller inn, som kan gjøre at "nisjevalutaer" kan ha livets rett (som supplement til en verdensvaluta). Du snakker som om økonomien er helt uavhengig av menneskers valg og ideologi, men mennesker velger ikke alltid det mest effektive, spesielt ikke hvis det er en god grunn til å ikke gjøre det (som i eksempelet hvor man kan lage et samfunn uten skatt, men likevel få til å finansiere "fellesgoder" og veldedighet).
Men vi får se... Det er flere spennende prosjekter på gang, så mye vil skje de kommende årene. Selv følger jeg ekstra godt med på Ethereum - uendelige muligheter der.
|
|
|
|
|
Det er jeg uenig i capsqrl. Det finnes gode grunner til å ha lokale valutaer. (Selv om jeg ikke ser poenget med eKrona)
Her er ett eksempel:
En lokal valuta, med innbygget stemmesystem. Monetær inflasjon på 1 %, hvor brukerne (les: innbyggerne i lokalsamfunnet) stemmer over hvor de nye pengene skal gå. Det er null skatt i dette lokalsamfunnet, og det er frivillig å bruke den lokale valutaen. Likevel velger folk å bruke den, for å støtte lokale veldedige organisasjoner (eller andre ting, f.eks: skoler, parker, politi, rettsvesen, rakettskjold, suppekjøkken, "nav light").
Liker man tingene som denne valutaen finansierer, da donerer man ved å være med å bruke den. Hvis man misliker det, så bruker man f.eks. Bitcoin istedet.
|
|
|
|
I will put it out there, how do we know you wont just take any accumulated money?
Well I thought with such small amounts, it wasn't necessary with escrow. But of course, it can go through a trusted user, if you can find any? |
|
|
|
A lot of people don't like to give money to charity, because they don't feel that they get much in return. But at the same time they might gamble away money, even though they know that there is a very small chance they will profit from it. So what about turning charity into a game, where you can win money? I don't know if it will work in practice, so this thread is an experiment to find out if it works. The Charity ExperimentFollow the experiment here: https://blockchain.info/address/16DWTDE2W7PN6cEXHBhyQ1WSuesCvKwuyqHow to participate: 1) Send 1 mBTC to this address: 16DWTDE2W7PN6cEXHBhyQ1WSuesCvKwuyq 2) Add a note that says which charity the money should go to The experiment ends when there has been no new payments for 24 hours. The last person to send 1 mBTC is the winner. He gets 50% of the accumulated money, and he gets to decide what charity gets the rest. I will start it off by sending 1 mBTC. If no one else participates, it will go to Sean's Outpost. |
|
|
|
|
MDG er sosialister forkledd som miljøaktivister. De er motstandere av alt som tar vekk økonomisk makt fra staten.
Stem på Det Liberale Folkepartiet (stemdlf.no), de er tilhenger av konkurranse mellom valutaer.
|
|
|
|
Bra artikkel, Sturle. Jeg syns du representerer Bitcoin på en bra måte, også i kommentarfelt under diverse artikler. Fortsett med det  Sendte 10 mBit til barten din (og testet CoinJoin-tingen til blockchain.info i samme slengen). |
|
|
|
Does this mean we crash tomorrow?
This overoptimism reminds me of the days before the last big crash, so that may very well happen... But I'm not selling, just in case it doesn't crash (and becase I've promised myself not to get "sellers remorse" again) |
|
|
|
Justcoin ligger på 1850 - 1988, så er vel ikke lenge før denne beveger seg over Sikkert et veldig noobt finansielt spørsmål, men lurer på en ting. Når Mt.Gox er høyere enn de andre børsene, hvorfor er det ingen som(eller kansje det er): kjøper BTC fra en annen børs Overfører BTC til Mt.Gox Konto Selger BTC. på MT.gox konto' Tar ut USD på Mt.Gox Setter inn USD igjen på annen børs igjen og repeterer ? Kan legge til at det du beskriver her kalles for arbitrasje og brukes overalt hvor man kan tjene penger på prisforskjeller, også på Mt.Gox  Men når det er såpass mange hindringer blir ikke prisene helt utjevnet. Du kan på en måte si at en dollar på Mt.Gox er verdt mindre enn en dollar på Bitstamp. |
|
|
|
From time to time I see mentioned the concept of "adding more decimal places" to Bitcoin if the need for more subdivision was required.
I VOTE AGAINST EVER ADDING FURTHER DECIMAL PLACES TO BITCOIN.
Wouldn't adding more decimal places be effectively be printing money? It would literally be creating more money availability out of thin air.
Sure, those who already possessed bitcoin would just have more bitcoin, as the decimal place would be sliding over in their favor.
But this is the same as printing more money and handing out "stimulus checks" to every citizen.
"Ohh, look I got free money" (actually your money just got diluted because everyone else just got more too, and on top of that: there would then be a new, greater total of currency in circulation than there was before, which devalues it all. AKA inflation)
If additional quantity of money is needed because of overpopulation, then a new currency should be created-- Not modifying the existing and altering the very principles which it's based on and stands for.
The reason why printing money is bad is NOT because you "create it out of thin air" and NOT because it increases the money supply. The reason why printing money is bad is because the value of the new money is stolen from the old money: The old money is "diluted". It effectively is a redistribution of wealth (or tax on savings). This is NOT the same as adding more decimal places, because adding more decimal places affects everyone equally! No value is being stolen from anyone, it only displays differently. (If you still don't understand: The reason why money printing is bad is because it is NOT distributed equally, as opposed to moving the decimal point) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
