I think some of these ideas are worthy of consideration.

I would just like to add this though.. as another possibility. I know that most people don't like monthly fees... but lets say a game that intertwined itself with bitcoin somehow... did charge a monthly (dollar or bitcoin) fee.  They could funnel a portion of that fee itself back into the game in creative ways. These ways would simply create awesomeness.

I'll give an example. Suppose everyone pays 15 dollars a month. 1 dollar a month from that goes to buying bitcoins. (note that they are actually buying bitcoins with a credit card in this situation essentialy. That's cool and I think this is one reasonable way you could do so without fraud being a big issue).

Now you take that sliver of the monthly fee... you have random sucky mobs drop a satoshi or two maybe. But what if you sent a good portion of that fund to some super mob? Now not only would people be wanting to get that mob for the challenge of it... but the loot itself would become something of real value. People might even form a super star guild of a few expert people and make a living off of just playing the game.

I really like the idea of pvp and loot dropping though as well lol.

Loot from mobs might be inconsequential in amount. But that's okay. If mobs dropped a satoshi here... a satoshi there. The point of that....... would simply be to enable those who played the game to trade their items for items with bitcoins without having to bring outside bitcoins in. To get the ball rolling so to speak.

your replies helped me. I thought I had skillz. When you said a light comes on I thought how could you see it since that part is facing down? Then it came to me. Lolll. was plugging it in upside downn. Argh.

seems like this is an additional way to spend them (not receive them). Always a good thing though.

I'm just curious. I have an idea for a website. it involves bitcoins... and it would need someone who is an expert programmer. I can only do amateurish programming at the moment . I'm more of an idea guy. but I have designed it entirely in my head. Would anyone be interested in becoming a partner and working for purely an equal part ownership of whatever is produced?

Just curious but what is the typical usage case for someone receiving one of these loans?

If the price of bitcoin goes to 32 dollars..... do you really think that if the price crashes again people will let the price go down as far as it has knowing that it has proven it can rise that far not once but more than once? I don't think so. If a crash happens I don't see it as being drastic. Of course it could be wishful thinking. But I'm happy whether the price goes down or up personally. In fact I would almost rather it go down so I can buy more bitcoins.

We really aren't on the same page. In the system I proposed where money is created through a loan and there are no such things as reserves, reserve ratios.. or a fractional reserve system...... How would a bank be insolvent if someone tried to withdraw $1? That person's money isn't loaned to anyone. There is no reserve ratio. There are no reserves... so how? The answer: you aren't actually thinking about what i'm saying.




If a government prints money ,it is a tax through inflation. If a government gets the Federal reserve to print in for them... the same. Unpreventable inflation isn't a bad thing. But preventable inflation is. Otherwise why is counterfeiting illegal? If a government taxes back what it prints/spends and not extra............ then it is not taxing additionally through inflation.  The point is that if government was not allowed to spend beyond what they can tax... and not allowed to inflate our currency... then taxes would rise to such a level that people would revolt when they saw the true cost of what it all really is.

In the first scenario where there is a public money system and there is a private one... if there is inflation in the public money system what happens to the private one? Nothing. Government employees and government money would just have less purchasing power. If there is deflation in the government money system what happens to the private one? There would obviously be less government employees since I doubt they would be working for free. Anyways there wouldn't be a sudden surge of government money then a sudden disappearance. Money would be spent throughout the year and money would be taxed throughout the year.

Now what happens if it is all the same system? Would there be massive deflation? Think about what you are saying here. You are basically saying that taxes  (removal of money from the system) would cause deflation.  Yet all I am doing is basically defining taxes as the payment of a debt. That's how banks operate. When the principal is paid back... the money is destroyed. The interest recirculates. Taxes (the repayment of the public money that was spent) would be no different. The taxes represent the exact opposite of what the spending itself first represented. There is a cancellation. And there is no deflationary and virtually no inflationary aspect to that system. It's simple..... and perfect. As long as you can get the government to agree not to print/spend more than they can actually tax. If the government simply created the money it needed to finance itself and taxed it back, no more and no less... then we wouldn't have a public debt. And we wouldn't be taxed by our government through inflation.

I can't seem to get mine to do anything  (mt gox yubikey)

The price rise of bitcoins will be inevitable. The amount of bitcoins that will be in demand by even a small portion of the world population... would mean we need to use those extra positions to the right of the decimal place. Which means bitcoins right now are incredibly undervalued.  Of course people were probably saying the same thing the last time it hit 30 dollars.

I disagree that it would be a bad idea. First you may wonder why a company would do this...... it may seem like they would lose money. But if some game was popular and it opened it's economy to use bitcoins.... it would bring something to the table that doesn't exist anywhere else. It would attract people because it adds this level of simply awesomesauce. And believe it or not a game could make a lot of money. Want to pay to repair your items? Well your bitcoins would be going to the company instead of to oblivion. Want the auction house to take a cut? Well now they are taking a cut... of real money. if they added some miniscule amount of bitcoins to the loot of the game... and people could add or remove bitcoins from the in game economy... I think it would be cool. I'll have to think about it more. Imagine how awesome player killing servers would be where when yyou died you dropped actual money ahaaa.

People want this nice and steady price rise. That's all fine and dandy. But I don't think popularity works that way. Justin beiber went from being relatively unknown to being famous rather quickly. It's not a linear thing...... just IMHO

Can you clarify what you mean? Because it sounds like you are saying I am advocating a fully backed system. When I said get rid of reserves that means there wouldn't be any reserves. No fractional reserve... and no reserves.


To make this easier to understand... imagine if government money was separate from private money. Lets call the government money "greenback" and the private money "blueback" . You can exchange one for the other. So when you pay your taxes... you can essentially pay with bluebacks or greenbacks. For the government to finance it's operations... if it creates a certain amount of "greenback" and spends it into circulation by paying government employees for example.... then those greenbacks would automatically have value since you can use them as payment of taxes. If the amount of greenbacks that are created in a year are also taxed back  then you cannot have inflation (from greenbacks) . If the greenbacks were not taxed back out of circulation... then whatever wasn't taxed would be inflationary and it would devalue them.  If there wasn't two separate systems but a single system.... and the government still spend theirs into circulation and taxed it back 1:1 then there couldn't be inflation in the currency (from the government sector) .


Of course. So if all the debts in the economy were paid back no money would exist. So no money exists right? since it's all just.... theoretical.

changing the price to 17 for 1........ or 32 for both shipping included....... I would sell the third one as well all 3 for 45. But it's a bitch to fit in the case so I doubt anyone has the case for it. The one I'm keeping I actually had to cut some of the metal off the backplate for it to fit.

The miner - this person either has free energy or they have dedicated hardware just for this purpose of mining as a project or they want to keep their room really warm through alternative heat!

Runs on the bank are only bad news because of rules that banks impose on themselves. Lending and "banking" could be two totally separate institutions but they aren't because of the convoluted self imposed rules banks put on themselves to masquerade the fact that they essentially create money from nothing and charge interest on it.

If person A's money is lent to person B... and person B's money is lent to C... and person C's money is lent to D and so on... and the money supply expands.... and they can all essentially "demand deposit" and spend their money at will... then is person A's money really being lent?  IF a = b and b =c and c = d then a = d. So person D's money is actually person A's.. And person C's money is also A's. ANd person B's money is also A's. If money is lent out multiple times and the total net effect of this is a growth in the money supply which means......... that if there is more money after a loan is created, then new money had to have been created. New money cannot also be older money. Someone's deposit is used as a basis for making another loan.. but the total net effect of what is going on is essentially new money is being created.

Some of these self imposed rules I am talking about are reserves themselves. The one redeeming value they have is that they are essentially one way the banks use to control the money supply itself. But they are a self imposed rule. If banks didn't have a reserve ratio then they would never have "bank runs" because meeting demands could be done without any problem. With the flick of a pen (or keystroke).

If the banking system was honest it wouldn't be as convoluted as it is. There wouldn't be reserves or reserve ratios. As soon as the Federal reserve deposits money and creates reserves at member banks you can calculate from that deposit how much theoretical money can be created knowing the theoretical maximum reserve ratios. So you don't need reserves to constrain the money supply. You could do the same thing through a more direct method.

Here is how an honest banking system would work:

For the public sector (the government), Instead of delegating the power to create money to some cabal (like the Federal reserve) instead you keep the power and create it yourself. You don't need to pay interest to yourself #1.  #2...... you tax back what you create. If you tax back what you create then inflation is impossible.   That's it. Compared to what we have now that is incredibly simple............ and honest. Politicians, however, would not like the idea of only being able to spend what they can directly tax since right now they spend so so much through inflationary (hidden) means.

For the private sector... if people were free to chose then they would pick something honest over something dishonest automatically. Which is probably why bitcoin would win. Or a fully backed currency with no "fractional reserve" part. But... many people ascribe our system of credit to be something worthwhile. Maybe it's not but here is how an honest credit system would work that could possibly compete with bitcoin or a fully backed currency.  If you design a debt based credit system then money is created through loans. What keeps loans from being inflationary is mostly that they are paid back. When money is paid back , the principal is destroyed and the interest is taken as a service fee. An honest system would take a service fee as a service fee. Also..... The amount of total money can be directly controlled. The question on inflation in such a system is important... and the more important question than "how much money " should be created is the length of loans themselves. A 1 minute loan ... is not inflationary at all. A 1 million year loan is entirely inflationary. To limit inflation in such a system you don't need to charge interest on loans. You need to give shorter loans.

Okay call me crazy but wouldn't it be cool if World of warcraft switched their entire economy to use bitcoins? Here is how it would work:

a satoshi is the smallest unit of bitcoin. Imagine if blizzard bought something like 5 bitcoins for each server and used them for the entire economy of each server. So how many units could just 5 bitcoins provide out of curiosity?

Would it be incredibly genius if blizzard did this... they bought a stash of bitcoins. Say 20 thousand. They have something like 300 servers. so they could start rewarding players with actual bitcoins instead of their own gold drops. Each player could also have a wallet that you could send bitcoins to outside of the game.

What would happen if they did this?

It may be a bit premature to say this... but the rate at which different entrepreneurial companies and people are utilizing bitcoin is the best sign(for me) of things to come.  I remember a little over a year ago when I almost bought bitcoins........ but I looked around and said to myself "where are bitcoins being used? Barely anywhere. What about that one gambling site clubs with seals? Hmm it seems pretty dead" . But now things are totally different than that. It's really cool to watch.

Personally I consider bitcoins a really good invention with regard to freedom itself. Not better than the internet itself.......... but it may just be second. I don't really go to bars or parties much but if there was a bitcoin gathering near me I'd probably go!

I say in the future... if we donate we should donate to political friendly candidates. Sure some of us aren't scared of government interference... or even think it would help bitcoin.  But I think bitcoin friendly politicians are the right way to go. Pretty much anyone affiliated with Ron Paul is probably friendly.

If bank lending causes the money supply to grow... then are loans really someone else's money? Obviously they can't be.