Have you had any communications since the transfer?
And there is a particular thread for putting the names of scammers, although I forget the name of it.
|
|
|
Doesn't affect "legitimacy" at all. The bitcoin calculator doesn't take into account the future difficulty jumps, so you'd generate 2$ the first two weeks and then less every 2016 blocks. 1. The figures probably add up, can't be bothered to check 2. No, why would there? You'd like the network to somehow guess that the computational power is "legitimate"? 3. Define "viable" Viable means achievable in a suitably short amount of time on an existing exchange, that is, not generating a bunch of coins and then finding out they're effectively impossible to sell. Then yes, it's viable.
|
|
|
1) Do my figures above add up?
Possiblely, but they will change again with each difficulty adjustment and trade price change. 2) Is there anything in Bitcoin's nature to prevent this?
No, why would there be? It's not our problem if you are immorally stealling clock cycles from your university. Don't be expecting sympathy if you get kicked out of school over this. 3) Is cashing out this amount of Bitcoin a month viable given the current state of the Bitcoin eco-system?
Depends on what one considers "viable", but trading bitcoins for actual stuff is pretty easy. Just to stress, these are hypothetical questions, but I'd be interested to know if anyone finds that this affects the legitimacy of bitcoin at all.
I'd doubt that anyone on this forum is going to pin your crimes upon Bitcoin.
|
|
|
Does anyone have any ideas how I could make mining only available to people on the local trust network?
You could do it by modifying the client to use a new genesis block, a new port and use an access controlled VPN or darknet. I don't know why you would want to do this for a local currency, though. It would be too weak to withstand any of the brute force attacks, even limited to known users via access controls. If you really want a local currency based off of Bitcoin, then you need to set up a single trusted server that issues one time use signed certs and back that currency up with a Bitcoin reserve. This way your local currency has, at a minimum, the value of the bitcoins in reserve.
|
|
|
That's really interesting, indeed. What he predicts is still unethical and bad for the economy, but definitely much less worse than what we have nowadays. Let's hope that's the path governments choose to take, instead of just stupid brute repression à la war on drugs. I still don't really think that a VAT tax is going to work very well for long, either. There is too much incentive for manufacters to cheat by selling directly onto the dark markets online. There is already, as reports suggest that Greece's dark (and largely untaxable) markets are roughly 40% of the GDP. There is no way that Greece, as a nation, can repay their foriegn debts if this trend continues; but in a Bitcoin future with governments dependent upon a VAT tax in Europe, the first real recession and half of the population will turn to the dark markets just to make ends meet. Brazil 50% of the economy is underground and do not pay taxes, and the government although bothered by it, even helps it anyway (for example building areas where you can setup your informal shop of smuggled or illegal stuff... only do not attempt to sell drugs or weapons there, this will cause the other shopkeepers to even kill you, to prevent you from attracting cops) Brazil is a completely different culture. Particularly one that doesn't have nearly the faith in, or co-dependency with, their federal government. Europe's social service programs are terriblely expensive, but they are popular enough for Europeans to put up with the high taxation required. I would say that Brazilians wouldn't suffer that kind of taxation, no matter how it was presented. I'm saying that Bitcoin could undermine that faith in governments by collapsing the social services for lack of funding, and make Europe more like Brazil.
|
|
|
its gone gawker, ruh roh!
Link?
|
|
|
That's really interesting, indeed. What he predicts is still unethical and bad for the economy, but definitely much less worse than what we have nowadays. Let's hope that's the path governments choose to take, instead of just stupid brute repression à la war on drugs. I still don't really think that a VAT tax is going to work very well for long, either. There is too much incentive for manufacters to cheat by selling directly onto the dark markets online. There is already, as reports suggest that Greece's dark (and largely untaxable) markets are roughly 40% of the GDP. There is no way that Greece, as a nation, can repay their foriegn debts if this trend continues; but in a Bitcoin future with governments dependent upon a VAT tax in Europe, the first real recession and half of the population will turn to the dark markets just to make ends meet.
|
|
|
Fake ID for beer eh? Underage? Good luck with that...
Yup im 20 thats why i need one and my girlfriends turn 21 soon and id rather not admit that id been less than truthful. I know i SHOULD tell her but lying is easier and safer. But lets not talk about morals lets talk real currency. Anyone? "good luck with that"? no one has fake in the U.S i think not, most of the people in my college have one but i just don't know sketchy enough people i suppose lol. You're not likey to find such sketchy people on this forum either. Try silk road.
|
|
|
@creighto: The 'You' in my questions refer to the development team. These were views they expounded during previous conversations.
Considering the vagueness of the questions, I'm not surprised that you were generally ignored. The old salts here get very weary of answering the same questions, and if you want a real answer to an unanswered question you have to frame the question well. 'Bitcoin is no worse in this respect than any fiat currency that you can name.'
Thats actually the point I am making. It is worse as long as you can still pay your taxes in the official fiat or make fillings from gold as there is no final backstop to it.
Only if you assume that there is a backstop to the fiat currencies that you compare it to. In practice, this may or may not be so. Technically there is nothing backing up the US FRN beyond "the full faith and credit of the United States (government)", so in the end what backs a fiat currency is the faith the general public has in the long term future of said government. If that is enough for you, then that's fine for you. You should not assume that others share your religion. 'That is a risk, but is dependent upon the 'accepter of last resort' having enough credibility to make the case that their version is actually better than Bitcoin.'
Again, thats the point I am making. ANY accepter of last resort would be better than now.
I disagree with this statement. A defined 'accepter of last resort' takes upon itself a huge liability by this action, potentially to their own destruction should the government decide to go after this institution. If the public even believes that the government can destroy this institution, then the currency dies for lack of trust in a future trade value. Bitcoin is valuable without any openly defined supporting institution. If what you say is correct, this should have never happened. The reality is that it did happen, so some significant economic support for the currency presently exists, which implies that it will continue to exist provided that said econimc support cannot be identified and subsequently undermined. 'Why, indeed. Why would these institutions start their own currency to compete with Bitcoin? That's not a trivial question, motivation is important.'
Morrocco: Inflation. Weedbars: Security blah blah....all the good things you guys talk about in other posts.
That's not an answer, it's a dodge of a serious rebuttal to your statements. By what premise do you assume that such motivations actually exist? It's rude to dismiss responders so, please don't do it again. 'Applecoins would be centralized'
Technically (please correct me if Im wrong as I probably am) don't Bitcoins have to be centralised to an extent?
No. That's the point. You can choose to centralize for yourself by depositing into a "bank" or website, but no one has to. There must be some form of register showing who owns what? You need ot read some more and return later. Plus, I don't think the public would care at all if the infrastructure could handle it more smoothly. Most people don't see money as a political act.They see it as a beer and a bag of chips at the pub.
They can have what they want by using a bitcoin bank or online wallet service, but monetary policy is politics. Bitcoin just makes alternatives to the establishment possible. Thanks for your replies and time everyone. The whole thing is totally awesome. I think that Creighto is a bit pissed at me, but frankly, if you can't take a look from a few steps back then you aren't being objective.
If I were mad at you, you wouldn't be talking anymore. But I do consider you a bit rude, coming into our house to crap on our table. You are not the first to comeup with this theory. I would say further to his 'political act' statement that ALL money is a political act.
I agree completely. Bitcoin is a wicked concept, but its replicable which is a fatal flaw.
Sure. That's why Facebook never took off, just being a novel version of a wiki after all. It was doomed from the start.
|
|
|
Where on earth is all this new hardware coming from? Presumedly from ATI's manufacturing plants in China.
|
|
|
Anonimity is possible with Bitcoin, but it is neither automatic nor particularly convienent.
It seems to me that it's NOT really possible, at least within a single wallet, without resorting to money laundering. Unless your outgoing transactions divide evenly into your incoming ones, it sounds like sophisticated analysis of the transaction graph would reveal a series of transactions that can all be reliably linked together, and therefore identified as coming/going to the same wallet. The only thing that breaks the chain is dropping your balance to zero. Now maybe the situation isn't as bad as that, but it's clearly a common occurrence, and I think you guys are downplaying it too much. This would be terribly dangerous to anybody who needs some level of untraceability but doesn't understand the technical details. It's not as bad as that. Anoniminity can be had even if your coins intermingle, as the secret data that really needs protecting is the association of your real world ID with those bitcoin addresses, and not the addresses from each other. I do admit that more control over which addresses the client uses for any given transaction would be a helpful feature in this regard, however. And yes, at the present time two wallet.dat files is a good idea if one intends to have an open Bitcoin identity as well as a anonymous one. There are ways to get coins from one to the other without associations if one is purposeful and careful, such as the bitcoin mixer; but it would be useful if this were something that the UI could handle. Someday it may.
|
|
|
I'll do it for 200. 100 if the resulting app is open-sourced.
Isn't there already an open source Point-of-sale system that could be modifiyed to handle bitcoin payments? I know that there is a POS system based off of the Ipad that already intergrates Bitcoin, but to what degree that is so, I know not. And they are not open source.
|
|
|
Based off of that, hashing growth isn't going to taper off any time soon. I only hope that USD valuation can keep up to some extent... else by three difficulty increases from now (assuming difficulty in the ~900k range), mining won't even pay for my electricity!
The rise in difficulty is driven by the rise in relative value, not the other way around.
|
|
|
This thread would be much better if there was less political posts to wade through looking for the actual rebuttals. Bitcoin is very good tech, all the wanky political assertions and theories and sweeping statements should get out and leave the way clear for the technical and economical talk.
However I beleive there is an Off Topic forum...
All life is politics, and Bitcoin is no exception. We may attribute whatever leaning we desire to the project itself, but he political motivations of the founders are not in doubt. They are alluded to in the genesis block. The quote from a newspaper? That only seems to imply that Nakamoto Satoshi does not approve of quantative easing or other expansive monetary policy. Are you saying that wouldn't be a political opinion? If more people will look into bitcoin they will not need all the time to think it is a project for people with perculiar political views and nothing more. A potentially global currency should not be dominated by such political persuasions. It would be as to say "let's make a form of money to be used only by right wing conservatives, we will insult, bore, and accuse of corruption, idiocy and badness everyone else".
I think that I'm actually insulted. Did you just call me a "right wing conservative"?
|
|
|
Now I'm not sure whether it's my client which set them off (I started that about a week ago, as I migrated from a shell a friend gave me), or whether it's Bitcoin's boostrapping process.
It's most likely your bitcoin client, as AT&T can filter IRC connections for anything that might look like an automated process using an IRC channel for command and control. I'd recommend sending a notice to the abuse address to let them know about Bitcoin and how it uses that particular IRC channel for peer discovery, and they can filter out that channel from their watchdog processes.
|
|
|
Anonimity is possible with Bitcoin, but it is neither automatic nor particularly convienent.
|
|
|
Interesting, but I think that I need more than can be stored into an 1/8" thick wallet would be limited to.
|
|
|
Thing that I miss from other forums is viewed thead - it always changes color/weight no matter if back button used or something else, on this forum if you back button to topics list or open threads in new window, it keeps being bold a.k.a. unread
I don't have this problem.
|
|
|
My faithful wallet is falling apart, and I've been ignoring it for months. I'm attempting to locate a custom leathermaker, or some other artisan, to make me a custom billfold that can safely hold two ID cards so that they can be seen without removal. I need one for my driver's license and one for my carry permit, both slightly larger than a standard credit card. I'll consider other materials than leather, if there is an artisan who prefers duct tape as an example. I'll expect to see photos of prior work.
Barring a custom job, I'll consider a mass produced consumer solution based on price shipped.
|
|
|
If I start a thread, asking a question, forgive me for believing that I have the right to determine when it has been answered.
Perhaps you need to narrow the scope of the question and try again. What about the explainations that you have received do you not understand? In addition, asking about valuations is subjective. I.E. the answer is relative to the person being asked, and not an objective truth that can be explained. The only objective truth concerning the "what gives Bitcoin value" is that something does.
|
|
|
|