|
It's actually calculating the answer to life, the universe, and everything.
|
|
|
|
Exactly, in countries where bandwith costs a lot, full nodes will tend to disapear.
So we will start to make holes in the mesh network.
It's not like most nodes are located in Europe and the US East, according to the map here: https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/If you think distribution has been fair so far, then you're wrong. I don't think if distribution is fair or not. OK, so what were you trying to say? |
|
|
|
Exactly, in countries where bandwith costs a lot, full nodes will tend to disapear.
So we will start to make holes in the mesh network.
It's not like most nodes are located in Europe and the US East, according to the map here: https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/If you think distribution has been fair so far, then you're wrong. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin wasn't designed to be a "global currency".
I disagree. |
|
|
|
This has been discussed before. It appears that the total amount of bitcoins was enough to cover M1 in 2008. I remember this discussion, actually.
Finney, Satoshi, and I discussed how divisible a Bitcoin ought to be. Satoshi had already more or less decided on a 50-coin per block payout with halving every so often to add up to a 21M coin supply. Finney made the point that people should never need any currency division smaller than a US penny, and then somebody (I forget who) consulted some oracle somewhere like maybe Wikipedia and figured out what the entire world's M1 money supply at that time was.
We debated for a while about which measure of money Bitcoin most closely approximated; but M2, M3, and so on are all for debt-based currencies, so I agreed with Finney that M1 was probably the best measure.
21Million, times 10^8 subdivisions, meant that even if the whole word's money supply were replaced by the 21 million bitcoins the smallest unit (we weren't calling them Satoshis yet) would still be worth a bit less than a penny, so no matter what happened -- even if the entire economy of planet earth were measured in Bitcoin -- it would never inconvenience people by being too large a unit for convenience.
Not sure if it still applies today, though. |
|
|
|
21,000,000 * 100,000,000 = 2,100,000,000,000,000 Satoshis
This isn't enough for a global currency.
Why do you think so? Do you have a source of the amount of world currencies? Because I couldn't find any... |
|
|
|
|
At least we're not dying, I guess?
|
|
|
|
I hope Bitcoins will still be use even after the death of Satoshi
How can we be sure that Satoshi isn't dead already? |
|
|
|
The only useful case is the remittance market because it's cheap, many features of bitcoin 2.0 are very cool, but it seems it's useless, it can't replace the current solutions.
Just a reminder, the current version of Bitcoin is 0.10.0. We still haven't got to 1.0 yet, and it will be years before version 2.0. |
|
|
|
anonymity is not a good thing, it can be used by anonymity/drug dealers etc, this is one important reason that government don't like bitcoin.
Streets are not a good thing. Criminals can use them to escape from a crime scene. |
|
|
|
What's the real value of a BMW car? Is there something you can't do do without it?
Without a BMW, I can't be like the cool kids. |
|
|
|
And, to be on topic, I don't think I've heard of another “pseudonymous” inventor in my life.
Who invented the wheel? There's a difference between pseudonymous and anonymous. Satoshi is a pseudonym, but we have a name, and we can talk about him. The creator(s) of the wheel are unknown and so we can't talk about them as individual(s). Actually, it's more than likely that different cultures developed the wheel independently. |
|
|
|
|
So, what Satoshi made right (even if he didn't invent it) was a decentralized protocol, right?
And, to be on topic, I don't think I've heard of another “pseudonymous” inventor in my life. But then again, I never met the real ones, so they might as well also be pseudonymous to me.
|
|
|
|
|
Considering that SHA256 is virtually unbreakable, I find BTC0.05 to be very low for a reward.
|
|
|
|
|
If Bitcoin was not the first cryptocurrency, then which one was? I'm curious.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin isn't for everybody.
Who says so? You? Why? Bitcoin IS for everybody, but we just need to agree on how it will be done. (everyone directly on the blockchain or via some other way like sidechains). If you state that "Bitcoin isn't for everybody" I can easily state that "Bitcoin isn't for you" because I want it so. This is a wrong premise. It just kinda can't be for everyone, because of the way that people are. The majority are sheep and/or dogmatics. Often, you can't even reason with them. The idea of Bitcoin is about 100 quadrillion light years away from their 'in the box' thinking style. Also I often get the question: 'why should I, there is already fiat?'... There are two different meanings of “for everyone”. One of them is: can everyone use it? And the other: is everyone accepting to use it? I believe we must make the answer to the first question yes even if not everyone is accepting it right now. I really see no point in making it an elitist system when only a few can use Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
Dammit i don't get it. I didn't see 50 shades of grey yet  Please don't. It's a movie that romanticizes sexual abuse. |
|
|
|
|
Please don't. This is awful.
|
|
|
|
If I put my dirty coins in a usb wallet and clean the usb wallet with soap, do they become clean coins?
yes, because they are gone then  Actually, I don't think the USB would be damaged at all. |
|
|
|
For the logo, per https://bitcointalk.org/?topic=1756.0 , I think there's no trademark... This work is in the Public Domain.
I don't think someone who puts his logo under PD would put the logo under trademark... (Correct me if I'm wrong) If it's in the public domain then it can't be trademarked, as far as I understand. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
