|
An interesting hypothetical to the spite-happy people.
My grandmother dies and leaves me $5000 inheritance. You are my next-door neighbor. You ask for some of the money. I say "sure, I'm feeling nice here's $10". Do you bash my $5000 car with a hammer because I didn't give you enough?
|
|
|
|
Essentially, it depends on your pride and your dollar value of spiting someone who insulted you.
The fact that people behave this way serves as an incentive for the person making the split to give you more than $.01.
I wouldn't accept less than $50.
I'll ship you 20 bitcoins, you want them? |
|
|
|
If I offered you $10 for free, would you accept? Or would you require my Income Tax return to make sure I don't have too much money and that's a "lowball" offer. What you make on your own doesn't concern me. What we are both offered and you get to distribute is a different story. They are only analogous if all you look at is the money. I'm sorry you don't like my values but there's nothing objectively superior about yours. It's purely subjective. You should accept $0.01 only if you value revenge less than that. I don't. You weren't both offered anything. You were offered $10. It does not affect you one bit what someone else was offered or what they offered to pass down to you. It only matters if you are envious and vindictive. Sure, there is nothing objectively superior to it. But I subjectively find "revenge" due to envy pretty despicable. |
|
|
|
You derive more pleasure from watching other people suffer than getting something on your own? I would get that envy checked out. Thanks for your opinion, duly ignored. If I offered you $10 for free, would you accept? Or would you require my Income Tax return to make sure I don't have too much money and that's a "lowball" offer. |
|
|
|
As you currently pose the scenario, I would derive more pleasure from watching the other person get nothing if they offered me less than somewhere around 40%. I expect exactly half but I will settle for slightly less in this case. My percentage changes depending on how much money is involved too. The lower the amount, the closer to exactly half I will demand. The higher the amount, the less I will demand. After all, 1% of a trillion dollars is still 10 billion dollars. I first heard this question posed at $100, in which case I want half or I can lose $50 to watch you do the same. If you are making the offer, it's wise to always offer half since that gives you the best chance to profit.
Anyone that says it's always rational to accept any offer is making the mistake of thinking that money is the only thing of human value. That's false. Money is a means to an end.
You derive more pleasure from watching other people suffer than getting something on your own? I would get that envy checked out. |
|
|
|
|
It's hilarious how pretty much everyone on here would take $10 for free in an isolated situation. But the second you find out someone else gets $4990, you get upset. Jealous much?
|
|
|
|
a physical coin is needed as a stepping stone or bridge to bring regular folks over to bitcoin. a silver coin is the best possible way of doing this that has no dollar amount marked on it and should look exactly like the bit coin logo . being 99.9 % fine silver of a certain weight could be exchanged at the market rate against any currency including bit coin and could not be counterfeit. They would be valuable in there own right and a useful tool in marketing & advertizing to friends. not necessarily designed to be spent in stores for coffee and the like, but definitely exchangeable and liquid enough to change into cash at any coin shop or pawn dealer.. i know that i for one would spend my electronic bit coin to buy them for investment purposes and as a second option of storing my accumulated digital value. silver minted coins always command a higher price than the spot or melt value and thats how the mint makes its profit. putting labor into raw silver and making a finished product. we already have enough paper to trade, so use that to turn attention to bitcoin it,s quite simple. instead of stamping www.bear-river-dollar.com right across it in red ink ,you stamp the bit coin website. every time you spend cash you tell people about it. when the bitcoin community has accumulated enough silver between them, we will be in a position to issue our own bitcoin plastic instead of mastercards and visas, as mastercard and visa will be wanting to rent your technology and not you renting theirs at point of sale. only discovered bitcoin this week and putting links down here www.bear-river-dollar.comI think you will discover the difference between commodities and currency. BTC could crash at any time. Silver will always be silver. I think the 1 oz round is the official currency of the silver currency. From that 1 oz you can convert to BTC at any time. So you could make a 1 oz round with the bitcoin symbol, but instead of calling it 1 BTC, or 40 BTC, you call it 1 troy ounce. Thus, there are no links and you could still trade the silver as silver. However, you could make your own symbol if you like. What's the point of putting 40 BTC on it? Who will accept the coin and give you 40 BTC if 40 BTC is worth more? Who will use the coin if it is worth more than 40 BTC? |
|
|
|
For a 0.001 BTC transaction they wouldn't need to wait for 6 confirms. They can just see it start to propagate through the network and assume it'll be good. If it later turns out it's not good they can eat the losses of, in today's exchange rate, a 1/10th of a USD cent.
If people start to systemically try double spending, NYT can require the user to create a free account and deposit 0.05 BTC of minimum balance and wait for the 6 confirms. It's still a whole lot better for the end user than a monthly 'subscription fee' when all you want is to read a few pieces a year.
It was mostly tongue in cheek, but that could certainly work, if you view ads, you get paid some credits too. I'm not sure NYT wants microtransactions, but someone might, and this is a good model. |
|
|
|
If 0.001 BTC transaction fees were possible that would open up the ability to do 'true' micropayments. This would be a brand new frontier to expand in Bitcoin business - e.g. imagine a news site charging per article view but not as clumsily as what NYT has been doing.
Microstransactions could be Bitcoin's killer app and expand the legal market uses of Bitcoin tremendously.
It's true though that there could be a lot of transactions making the blocks larger.
I could just see the NYT doing this. Please wait 10-60 minutes while we confirm your transaction. |
|
|
|
I think the default client should show at least one additional digit by default, and of course there should be the option to increase it arbitrarily.
The 0.3.21 release (I hope to have a release candidate available today) will support full-precision values-- you will be able to send 1.00123456 BTC, if you like. Sending less than 0.01 BTC still requires a 0.01 BTC fee, though. Changing that to "sending less than 0.01 BTC requires a 0.001 BTC fee" might be worth thinking about, but I think there are higher priorities on the core bitcoin TODO list. How frequent do you plan to make releases? I'm assuming pretty quick. .01 might be worth quite a bit by the time the next release comes along. Is it you worry about too many worthless transactions causing the blocks to grow too big? I'd lean towards a bit lower of a limit earlier rather than later, though. We are seeing massive deflation already, so another few months and $10/BTC could be reality. |
|
|
|
You need to take into account that the reward for finding a block is going to be divided by two in ~2 years. This will certainly change the trend.
By the time the reward gets halved, the difficulty will increase at least 10-fold and, therefore, reward per compute unit. I think nobody should really care right now about halving the reward. I care, and I think most miners care. My best projection places Difficulty near 900,000 come Jan. 2013. That means your average 5870 core could take 20 weeks, on average, to solve a block. If fees+$/BTC does not compensate for this a lot of miners could drop out, and starting a new mining operation with current technology could become unattractive. Maybe Difficulty will even plunge once the block bounty halves. But this will depend largely on what happens with $/BTC. Right now it looks like we could be averaging $3.20/BTC by then. But as to what happens after that, I'm taking a mostly wait-and-see approach. Is there a precedent we can draw from to make a projection? New mining operations are already barely profitable. Unless you have free electricity. You could get more BTCs buying them on the exchange than creating a rig and running it for the same cost. But you couldn't resell the hardware when you are done, but even then I think you come ahead just buying the coins. |
|
|
|
Would that be punitive damages you are referring to? Or is there a specific and real damage he caused and to whom?
I'm assuming he was ripping it off. I haven't been paying much attention to know the exact situation. If someone steals from me $20, I think $60 repayment would be fair if they were caught. |
|
|
|
Mt Gox should make their site easy to replicate by anyone who wishes to mirror it .
The problem is not the site, but getting the infrastructure set up, getting bank accounts set up, etc... |
|
|
|
1- MtGox lets you do do "Direct deposit" for withdrawals in the US:
"If you live in the US or EU we can send it to you by direct deposit.
Minimum withdraw amount in the US by direct deposit is $800. There is no fee."
2 - not a huge problem for its purpose.
3 - There are other markets than mtgox.
4 - true
5 - Don't get it.
MtGox lets you deposit using ACH for free. Sure, there are transaction costs right now. I don't think were even close to ready for mainstream adoption, but that doesn't mean it won't be possible. It's a chicken and the egg problem. If more merchants accepted it, then it would lower transaction costs (because you could actually spend bitcoins rather than eat transaction costs of converting them). But no one accepts them because no one else does. Something needs to give first. So the first targets will be areas where BTC is actually superior even with the costs. Some might be illicit things. Some might be international payments that already have high fees. But as that grows, there will be more use for them, and more people might accept them.
I agree that making it easier for merchants to interact with Bitcoins (make it painless and costless for them) might be a good first step.
1. That's great, but the problem is getting bitcoins in the first place. 2. For its present purpose, I agree, but not as a general currency 3. Yeah and what're their volumes? 5's a bad joke. 1 - there are lots of ways to get them. For small transactions, coinpal works. There's a fee, yes. For medium transactions, there's OTC. For large transactions, wire mtgox, eat the $30 fee (which is nothing on a $1000 transaction). Yes, there are fees. Yes, it makes little sense to move in and out of btc and back into USD. 2 - Sure it does. If you need instant transactions, you do it the same way mastercard/visa do it. Current banks take 3-5 days to do big transactions. These pieces are not in place, but that's not to say they couldn't be put in place. There's just little need for it now. 3- nothing because mtgox is the primary place. So if something happened to mtgox, then everyone moves somewhere else. Sucks for anyone who has money stuck there, of course. |
|
|
|
Please please please please cast your vote, so i can know how much i have to repay to faucet for stealing 40 coins from it due to abusing.
I'm typically in favor of repaying the losses, then repaying double beyond that for damages. So perhaps 80 is ok in this case since he came clean. |
|
|
|
One of PayPal's and the Banks' most popular products is "repeat billing" or "subscription payments".
Customers love it for it's ease of use and businesses love it for the constant income.
I should be able to enter a bitcoin address into my bitcoin client and pay it the exact same amount of bitcoins whenever I so choose.
Imagine having all of your subscription payments easily accessible from a single program on your desktop?
Right now I have to make sure I top up my cell phone every month with my credit card through their website. I have an automatic payment setup to withdraw money from my bank account for a dedicated server I rent. I have care insurance payments that can only be dealt with via fax+phone being charged to by checking account. And I have some forum subscription payments that go through PayPal. It's a nightmare to change any of them. If I could just click "cancel subscription" or uncheck a box on my desktop to cancel a subscription I would be thrilled!!!
It's a good idea, but probably not a deal breaker right now. There are lower hanging fruit to go after. At least in my opinion. |
|
|
|
The way I see it, there are several large problems that will prevent Bitcoin from becoming a widely accepted.
1. It's really hard to buy BTC and when you do, fees are prohibitively expensive. There simply is no easy, fast, automated, and cheap way to get it. Are people working on this? Will Mt Gox one day be able to withdraw from your bank account via ACH?
2. Lack of instantaneous transactions. Is this even possible without either centralization or fraud being introduced?
3. Single point of failure with regard to market data. Once the Feds decide they've had enough and charge the guy running Mt. Gox with laundering, BTC growth will be in trouble.
4. All the major growth opportunities right now are in black markets (drugs, gambling, etc). I have no problem with this per se, but it's a problem if BTC ever wants to gain legitimacy.
5. They're not called credits!! Unbelievable!
I feel that the big one is definitely #1. BTC is getting the press it needs, but just lacks the ease of use and is really expensive (1-3% USD->MTG, .65% + bid-ask MTG->BTC). I feel that the only reason people would put up with the costs is because it gains you access to stuff previously not accessible (black markets), which is bad.
1- MtGox lets you do do "Direct deposit" for withdrawals in the US: "If you live in the US or EU we can send it to you by direct deposit. Minimum withdraw amount in the US by direct deposit is $800. There is no fee." 2 - not a huge problem for its purpose. 3 - There are other markets than mtgox. 4 - true 5 - Don't get it. MtGox lets you deposit using ACH for free. Sure, there are transaction costs right now. I don't think were even close to ready for mainstream adoption, but that doesn't mean it won't be possible. It's a chicken and the egg problem. If more merchants accepted it, then it would lower transaction costs (because you could actually spend bitcoins rather than eat transaction costs of converting them). But no one accepts them because no one else does. Something needs to give first. So the first targets will be areas where BTC is actually superior even with the costs. Some might be illicit things. Some might be international payments that already have high fees. But as that grows, there will be more use for them, and more people might accept them. I agree that making it easier for merchants to interact with Bitcoins (make it painless and costless for them) might be a good first step. |
|
|
|
You could not have a bitcoin poker website or bitcoin sever using bitcoin. The Doj would shut it down. Server to server would not work because you could cheat. The site would still have to be overseas and you hope the doj would not shut it down.
Just like they shut down pokerstars.eu Of course it would be overseas. |
|
|
|
Maybe even more useful than gathering shipping info would be to allow the merchant to specify the price in some currency other than Bitcoin.
In other words the customer pays the payment processing service in Bitcoin and the service gives the merchant the currency the merchant specified.
Paypal does that, doesn't it? I can tell it my price in CAD for example and I don't care what currency the customer chooses to use? Paypal tells them how much it will cost in their own currency to buy the thing I have priced in my currency?
That frees merchants from the entire headache of trying to play forex on the side as well as operate their business. Set your price, let your payment processing service take care of how to accept different currencies different credit cards etc etc, all you need from the processing service is the price you specified in the currency you specified. The more different currencies and cards and mobile/phone payment tokens and so on and so on the payment processor accepts the better but all that complication should be the payment processor's headache not the merchant's.
-MarkM-
This is something I had been working on before I noticed this thread. It's trivially easy to do if you go with mtgox. Set up a payment processing service that takes bitcoins and squares up with the merchants at some later date, similar to how PayPal or credit cards work. The customer sets the dollar amount. The payment service has a balance of coins on mtgox. When the order comes in, you figure out how much you could sell the coins for on mtgox. Add in a small transaction fee for your trouble (still probably cheaper than a credit card). They transfer the coins to you, you wait for however confirmations you need. You instantly sell on mtgox (and transfer the ones you got to your mtgox account to replace them). The merchant can periodically check on orders to see when you "accepted" the customers transaction, and then begins shipping the order. |
|
|
|
She stuck to her philosophy but it cost her.
Except for the bit where she went on government assistance... It was never a violation of objectivism to take advantage of the system that exists. "I swear by my life, and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine." Really? I guess she didn't *ask*, but if someone is offering another man's life, she'll take it. Note: I don't have a problem with taking advantage of a system up to the point I was stolen from. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
