Bitcoin Forum
May 25, 2024, 12:00:58 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 [28] 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 »
541  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Will this CA law be a boon for BTC? on: May 12, 2011, 10:33:42 PM
1000 internets to nttgc! :-)
542  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoins are so large.. on: May 12, 2011, 08:11:00 AM
The usual thing thing to do when you can't write "µ" is to use "u".

Um... oh yeah. Good call.

(In my defense I've only gotten about 9 or 10 hours of sleep so far this week...)
543  Economy / Marketplace / Re: Introducing Bitbills! on: May 12, 2011, 07:43:53 AM
Good work! :-)
544  Bitcoin / Project Development / Re: Bounty 20 BTC: Wi-Fi Hotspot, enabled by bitcoin on: May 12, 2011, 07:35:48 AM
If anyone wants to do this, they may be able to learn something from the Pirate Box project:
http://wiki.daviddarts.com/PirateBox
545  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoins are so large.. on: May 12, 2011, 07:27:45 AM
I'd recommend keeping things as they are. There's too much opportunity for confusion in trade if some people start using the word "bitcoin" to mean 0.0001 of another person's "bitcoin." If you want to start using bigger numbers, use a word other than bitcoin. Of course, if you're going to use a word other than bitcoin, why not decicoin, centicoin, millicoin and/or microcoin...? Not only are they unique and unlikely to cause confusion, but they incorporate intuitive descriptors of quantity familiar to most of the civilized world.

They could be abbreviated like this:
1dBTC
1cBTC
1mBTC
1mcBTC

Or 1muBTC if you want to pay homage to the greek letter normally used to signify "micro." (I would copy and paste it here, but all my attempts so far have resulted only in the letter 'm.')

No need to use all of my suggestions: one will do. I understand if the metric system is too complicated for your taste...  Wink

[edited]
I wouldn't mind using mili and micro but I'd prefer moving the decimal place to the right once the exchange rate gets too high to spare people from having to deal with tiny numbers.

But... moving the decimal place is what milli- and micro- do!

+1
546  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Building under CentOS/RHEL 5: what a nightmare!!! (solved) on: May 10, 2011, 10:10:09 PM
I had the same problem last time I tried building bitcoind under CentOS. The problem is that when you copy and paste the makefile from laszlo's manual, spaces get inserted at the beginning of indented lines instead of tabs. Make sure the line in question is indented with a tab character and not spaces. Make cares about that stuff.
547  Other / Meta / Re: Bootstrapping Bitcoin on: May 10, 2011, 05:25:43 AM
I feel like this isn't the first time I've seen this idea floated.
548  Bitcoin / Project Development / Re: Handheld Bitcoin Wallet on: May 10, 2011, 05:10:26 AM
2) Set up to be compatible with running on another decentralized network IN ADDITION TO the Internet. Back in the pre-Internet days, emails were shuttled back and forth via modem over FIDOnet. The same decentralized communication structure could be set up, since FIDOnet is still in use today and there is a certain degree of crossover between the Internet and FIDOnet. You may scoff, but redundancy is a good thing.

Actually, we don't scoff at all:
http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=7181.0
549  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin Prices climbing back near $4/BTC on: May 09, 2011, 09:39:13 PM
Glad I bought that Bitcoin bond!   Grin
550  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: What is the minimum hardware required for running bitcoind? on: May 07, 2011, 09:56:11 PM
Yeah, I imagine making a tiny, portable client is entirely doable. Bonus points if you can give it a rechargeable battery that recharges with, say, body heat or the motion of walking. Or solar power. :-3

But it will be awesome regardless.

Edit:
For a rapid prototype, you might try looking at a microcontroller like the Arduino, or perhaps something less hobby-horse if you're already adept at electrical/computer engineering. There's already a Wifi shield that seems low-power enough for a rechargeable battery.
551  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: What is the minimum hardware required for running bitcoind? on: May 07, 2011, 07:08:06 PM
From the article malditonuke posted:

Quote
With storage available through an SD card slot, this thing has everything you could want in a computer (except maybe Wi-Fi; at the time of this writing I was unable to confirm networking)...
552  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: What is the minimum hardware required for running bitcoind? on: May 07, 2011, 06:48:32 PM
Well, I can't point you to any place that lists the requirements for bitcoind, but I know that the Bitcoin Linux client 0.3.20 was compiled in Ubuntu 10.04. Pretty sure Ubuntu 10.04 can run the 0.3.21 binary too. According to the Ubuntu website, you can get an Ubuntu server install with just 128MB of RAM:
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/SystemRequirements

You should be able to run the bitcoind binary on the server install without any trouble. Alternatively, you could install something like Slackware ARM (http://www.armedslack.org/) and then compile a version specifically for that distro.

Of course, all this is moot since it looks like the Tiny PC has no way of connecting to the Internet.
553  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: 6990 PSU requirements on: May 07, 2011, 06:30:56 PM
No.  Undecided

Edit:
Looking at the specs on the PSU, it seems the cables I'm worried about provide a maximum of 150W. With the 6990 supposedly vetted for up to 475W, I think I'll probably be safe. I'm going to switch on the machine later and I'll let you guys know what happens, just in case someone else ends up having the same questions I did.

Edit 2:
Dug through the PSU box one more time in an attempt to find something useful before embarking on an experiment which could fry my video cards and found two 6 to 8 pin adapters. Put those on and powered up and... well, three long beeps and no signal from the video cards. But the fans were spinning and I'm pretty sure the cards are alright. I tried to get a signal from a third card of a different model and still wasn't able to get anything.
554  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / 6990 PSU requirements on: May 07, 2011, 12:06:12 PM
I'm trying to set up a mining rig right now, but unfortunately I overlooked a small detail: the two 6990s I got require two 8 pin PCI-e power cables each. My PSU has four 6+2 and four 6 cables. The 6-pin cables come straight off the 6+2 cables (wired in series, so to speak) so that makes me think the 6+2 cables on their own provide a little more juice than a 6+2 cable is supposed to provide.

I could just use two of the 6+2/6 pin cables for each of the cards, but I'm afraid that might fry my cards. I can't really afford that, so I was wondering if anyone could offer some insight here.

My PSU is a Cooler Master Silent Pro Gold Series 1200W:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817171055&Tpk=cooler%20master%201200W

Thanks. :-)
555  Bitcoin / Project Development / Re: Multiple Bitcoin Instances / Identities on: May 05, 2011, 10:58:16 AM
As far as I know, the ability to have multiple wallets has been a long-requested feature. I think I heard that the way the original client is coded makes the implementation of that feature quite difficult. Not sure though.

Bitdollar is a third-party client which allows the use of multiple wallets, though the wallet format it uses is different from the one the original client uses so you won't be able to import your wallet.dat file or export your Bitdollar wallet for use in the original client. I've downloaded it and taken a look at it. No viruses and my wallet.dat file is still intact. Haven't tried using it for large amounts though, so I can't personally vouch for its long-term trustworthiness.
556  Bitcoin / Project Development / Re: Decentralize Financial Institutions - Part 1, Planning on: May 03, 2011, 05:23:08 AM
If we agree on a protocol such that all sites can share data, we can make the whole Bitcoin economy a 'decentralized exchange.' When any one site fails, another can take its trust database and start with that. To avoid tampering the databases should probably be public knowledge.

+1

This is exactly what I've been hoping for.
557  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: The real bitcoin value on: May 02, 2011, 10:39:38 PM
Some merchants already provide goods against a fixed price, some adjust against the markets quickly.
My focus is on the ones that provide against the fixed price. One could value their goods in USD and see
how many bitcoins they want for that. From that you can calculate a price per bitcoin. If you would average
all these rates (from the different merchants) out, you would IMHO get a more realistic price of how much
a bitcoin would be worth.

And that's as far I would personally like to follow the idea. Fixing prices really does not work. However, if one were to calculate the price of bitcoins using the method described above, it might yield a useful metric for measuring the health of the economy. It would certainly yield a much smoother chart than the one at Mt. Gox.

I've actually been thinking for a while about implementing this idea using Bidding Pond sales. Glad to see that others are thinking of doing the same.

If I were to start a GitHub project for this and if I were to provide a server to host it, how many of you would be interested in contributing? Would you all be cool if we built the core in Django, or would you prefer a PHP framework of some sort?
558  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Keeping the economy honest on: May 02, 2011, 10:26:17 PM
I agree up to the forcing part. A private or non-profit consumer group would be great! If businesses don't want to participate, they should not be forced though. It would be up to the consumer to avoid their product.

Okay, I can agree with that. By "forcing" I simply meant creating an environment hostile to opaque business practices.

Anyone up for creating a consumer advocacy group of some sort?
559  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Keeping the economy honest on: May 02, 2011, 08:53:01 PM
Bitcoin is not democratic. It is voluntary.

Sorry, I meant democratic in the sense that it currency is "issued" by the users of the currency instead of a central organization, and in the sense that it would take a majority of us agreeing on a change to the bitcoin system for such a change to take place. Granted, we would be splitting the block chain and thus would not be a true democracy, as the minority would not be forced to go along with the majority. I say "democratic" for lack of a better word. The essence of what I am trying to say is that bitcoins tip the balance of power over currency away from central organizations and back into the collective hands of the currency holders. "Voluntary" is, I see, probably more accurate, though not exactly the word I was looking for as it fails to capture the redistribution of power the bitcoin system entails.

Hey, that sounds like a pretty good idea!  Imagine if we organized something like that around the bricks-and-mortars banks.  We'd be labeled as terrorists.

Which is why I think it would be a good idea to start any preventative practices now, while our community is still nascent. Once the normals start pouring in it'll be quite hard to start such a movement for that very reason. "You want me to do what? Isn't that bad?"

Can you explain how you send more bitcoins than you have?

Of course. When your bitcoins are held by a bitcoin bank, the only assurance you have that the bitcoins are still there is the number on your screen and, someday, your ATM receipt. Bitcoins are like cash minus the infini-flation and are subject to many of the same abuses.

As far as the rest of your post, the way to keep organizations honest is to be a knowledgeable consumer/user and don't use the organizations that do business in ways you dislike.

I understand. Unfortunately it's not that simple, though I wish it were. Being a "knowledgeable consumer/user" isn't possible if an organization lies well. I was too young at the time to remember any details, but I understand this is what happened with Enron. Sure, they went under eventually and all their lying caught up with them, but by that time the damage had been done. I don't think there's anything wrong with consumer activist groups helping keep willing businesses transparent and forcing the unwilling ones (through peaceful means, by my ideology) to do the same.

If a bank is practicing fractional reserve while claiming full reserve, well that's fraud.

True enough. Though I would argue that it is also an undesirable state of affairs akin to fraud, though obviously not the same as fraud, when there is a disconnect between what a bank's customer means when they say "fractional reserve" and what the bank means when they say "fractional reserve." The bank's culpability in such a case would come in degrees directly correlated to how clear or obfuscated they chose to make their use of their customers' money. After all, nobody should be held liable for another person's willful ignorance; nor should a person be faulted for believing falsely when another deceives them.

Each bank customer can set how much of their deposits the bank is allowed to use.
If you specify 0% this would mean the bank just stores your money and you'd have to pay a fee.
If you specify 25% perhaps then it would be free, but you earn no interest.
At 50%, you earn a small interest
At 90%,  you earn max interest

Your monitor software or service is then programmed to warn you if the account drops below your specified limit. The software or service could also provide stats for different banks, how much reserve they have on average.

Could this be implemented in practice?

Yes, actually. My initial thoughts were to keep the loaning institutions and the banking institutions separate, at least in terms of interface. But if one wanted to keep them together and allow fractional reserve banking while keeping things voluntary and transparent, that would be a pretty good way to do it.

Couldn't one monitor a banks transactions through block explorer?

The block chain is already public.

You both make really good, really obvious points. I can't believe I overlooked that. I fail.

Though I can see how the bank run idea *could* become relevant if a bank were to become big enough to offer "instant transfers between bank members and improved interest rates" if only every participating member sends their bitcoins to the same address and uses the bank's interface to transfer. But you both are right: the system itself resists allowing a person to unwittingly become party to fractional reserve banking.

It's not some sort of scam, it's merely how the system works.
...
Yes there is corruption in banking, and an enforcement gap in fact, many many problems indeed. But at least understand the problem, let's drop all this 'black helicopters' shit.

Fair enough. Although as far as I'm concerned, banks should be full reserve unless a person opts in to some sort of well-defined investment or loaning program. Loans should follow as direct a path between the source of the money and the recipient as possible. Think Kiva, but on a bigger scale. That's my dream system at present.

Btw, any ideas on how one might allow/encourage community ownership and development of a bitcoin service? The bank run idea was obviously a bust, fractional reserve banking being impossible to pull off without a vigilant account-holder's knowledge thanks to the block chain.

Edit:
I really do think the development of more freely available, non-profit, public bitcoin services would be in the best interest of the bitcoin community. I mean, it wouldn't be a bad thing if people could exchange their currency for bitcoins at no cost, right? And pulling my money in and out of a bank for free and without restriction (as MyBitcoin allows) is good too, right? And allowing a bank's customers to add new services to the bank, a la Facebook apps, and allowing the same to peruse the source code of the bank's system to audit and learn and perhaps start their own services would, in fact, be in the community's best interests, right? That is, after all, what I am hoping to accomplish with my service. Am I preaching to the choir or am I out of tune here?
560  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Keeping the economy honest on: May 02, 2011, 12:31:01 PM
From what I can tell, bitcoins embody a democratic, open approach to currency and economics. I like this about bitcoins, and I imagine I'm not the only one. However, I'd like to try extending this approach to the institutions that the bitcoin economy builds itself on. These institutions are, after all, going to pop up and provide the foundation for most of the latter-day companies that enter the arena. MyBitcoin and their SCI, which quite a few vendors have come to rely on (from what I can tell), is a prime example of this. If these institutions are not likewise democratic and open, they will serve to attenuate the tone of the entire economy. Bitcoins cannot be printed, but they are really hard to tie to any given individual or organization. If a bitcoin bank were to misrepresent the number of bitcoins they were in possession of and loan out more than they had, they would effectively be printing money. If they were to use different addresses for every deposit, verifying the amount of money they actually had on hand would be nearly impossible.

I think that it would be in our best interests as a group to create practices and institutions that will keep the foundation of this economy as open and democratic as the currency itself. I've begun a service similar to MyBitcoin for this purpose, and I have a couple ideas on how to keep it open and accountable, but without a system for the communal government of a bitcoin service I'm afraid it'll end up just being me over in a corner with my service enacting policies to satisfy my own ideology like some South American dictator.

My initial thoughts are to either have a direct democracy for the direction of the website, with open proposals and direct voting, or else a representative government, where elected leaders are given the right to run the website for either a term or for as long as they service the will of the customers, whichever comes first. The end result I want is a system by which a bitcoin service can be run efficiently, with its workings visible to the public and its leadership directly accountable to the people they are serving.

Does anyone have any ideas on how that might be achieved?

Also, does anyone have any ideas on how a community might be able to keep an institution honest? As far as banks go, I was thinking it might be wise to organize annual or semi-annual bank runs, where all the customers of a bank withdraw all their holdings at the same time. This would help keep banks from playing fast and loose with other people's bitcoins and would force them to keep their dealings at least partially transparent.

What do you think of this idea? Does anyone have any more ideas like this? Or am I barking up the wrong tree entirely?
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 [28] 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!