Oh hey ANOTHER thread where Atlas is begging for money.
Why did you not post this under one of your many existing aliases, Atlas?
Um, excuse me? all OTHER instances aside, here, all he did was set something up on ANOTHER service, THAT SERVICE is collecting money only from those who believe it's a good cause, and that service gives money to OTHER people. I don't see "Atlas" begging for, or receiving, any money. As certain someone would say, "check your premises"  |
|
|
|
|
FYI, no word from Regretsy. Should I try again, or leave it be, and focus our attention on another charity?
|
|
|
|
|
Would you be willing to provide better prices for those providing more proof of ID along with credit information?
|
|
|
|
|
The best, most guaranteed, and oldest professions are still XXX related. I can totally see one of these being an xxx themed cleverbot that charges for conversations, or a bot that collects, aggregates, and sorts porn for you and provides it as a service (a netflix of porn).
|
|
|
|
Lol! I would get paid 0.0029 BTC for tweeting that  |
|
|
|
|
My only concern with this is that I suspect anyone with a twitter account who knows about bitcoin has likely already informed their followers to the point that they are sick of hearing about it.
|
|
|
|
|
When you do folding@home, you waste a MASSIVE amount of energy and computational power on useless calculations. Most of the results are wrong and can't be used. Once in a while, someone's computer calculates the problem correctly, and that result is the only one that is useful (possible drug or whatever). With bitcoin, there is massive waste, resulting in one calculation that is useful (transactions between a bunch of people get recorded in the ledger and money can change hands). You could argue about which single correct calculation is more important/beneficial, but other @home distributed computing setups are just as wasteful.
|
|
|
|
|
Considering he used his real first name, that's not that difficult.
|
|
|
|
|
So, in the future, we can look forward to losing our jobs not to foreigners, but nebulous AI? Awesome.
I for one welcome our future computer bacteria overlords, and would fully support this experiment with initial seed BTC funding.
|
|
|
|
That probably puts it most succinctly, and I haven't thought about it that way previously. The money goes into something one way or another. The spent electricity feels like waste- but even that can be useful.
A quick solution to your question would be for miners to use their waste "heat" for something 'useful'. Many heat their homes with it, and I've heard of some people drying fruit with it. Rather then redesign the coin, why not redesign the miner? Indeed if FPGA's take off there might be much less waste heat/electricity all in one go.
Sometimes the simplest solution is the least obvious. :-)
I've heard that switching around bits in processors uses almost no energy whatsoever, and most of the wattage used is expelled as waste heat. If true, low wattage FPGAs only have an initial fixed cost as the barrier, and long term, people will likely just buy more FPGAs, pushing the difficulty level up, and getting the energy costs (variable cost) of all running FPGAs right back up to where it isn't profitable to mine anymore. So the only effect they will have is higher initial investment and more hardware doing the work, much like the switch from CPU to GPU mining. Simplest solution to this whole thing is already built in: decreasing reward amounts, and (hopefully) market determined transaction fees. |
|
|
|
Energy *is* being wasted if you consider that the same amount of *work* can be done for a lower *cost*.
Not sure I understand you correctly here, but (diminishing returns) as long as each extra bit of work can get me a bit of a return, won't people continue to exchange/waste work to keep buying lottery tickets until it's no longer profitable, the same way people continue to exchange/waste work for mining rigs rigs and electricity until mining is no longer profitable? What is the difference between $25,000 being spent on lottery tickets to secure a system, and $25,000 being spent on mining to secure a system? And if the former is less than $25,000, how do we know it's just as secure, if security largely depends on it being too costly to attack a system? I'm trying to look at this as a series of simple math problems, and I feel I may be missing a variable that would differentiate the two systems. Maybe the whole system can be made way cheaper to run simply by lowering the rewards (already automatic) and lowering the transaction fees? People won't mine/waste electricity of the cost of mining drops below the payout amount. |
|
|
|
Something like a reset may happen soon. The average US wage is about $25K and the average credit card debt is $15k. Meanwhile jobs are continuing to disappear. People say that Bitcoin cannot keep up with the massive VISA network, but what if bankruptcy becomes common and people turn to other types of money and credit besides the banks? Can VISA sustain massive bankruptcies as people try to keep from losing their homes?
The credit card companies have no problems with defaults. The great thing about charging 28% interest and lots of small fees is that you can have 1 in 3 customers default and you are still making a healthy profit. It's the other way around. The 28% is charged BECAUSE of defaults, based on actuarial probability calculations of how many accounts i a large pool will default. If fewer people defaulted, we'd have lower interest rates. Likewise, number of people defaulting going up will cause credit cards to increase interest rates, and there is a point at which interest rates or fees become so high that no one is able or willing to accept them any more. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin offers only limited anonymity.
Yet people who stole from Allinvain, MtGox, MyBitcoin, and Bitcoin7 are still totally anonymous. |
|
|
|
It’s good to see true long-term bulls with conviction. I think that’s, on a much larger scale and time frame, all it takes to make Bitcoin a true store of value.
You can’t believe how I nearly shit my pants when it crashed from 1$, yet I just bought more at the time.
Quite the bear trap …
My investment "classes" have basically conditioned me to keep buying when prices go down, as long as it's something you believe in (such as S&P index), since all that's happening is the prices to buy it are getting cheaper. That's the same way I view Bitcoin; I believe in the technology and the people working on implementing it, and over the last six months it's just been getting cheaper to buy into it. I was probably one of the few people being happy about the 2008 crash, too, since that allowed me to quickly catch up to more seasoned investors on the rebound. |
|
|
|
my main form of saving will continue to be Bitcoin until I see something better
Ditto! Dollar cost averaging makes the pain less and less over time, too (used to be I needed BTC to be $18 to break even. Now it's under $10) |
|
|
|
Very cool, nice job rassah.
BTCurious must be a writer, those tiny edits that most people would toss away as whatever, really improve the email, which I already thought was good.
I'm just a grammar nazi, not a writer, so I definitely appreciate the changes and help! |
|
|
|
I hope I'm not jumping the gun with this one... To: Helen@regretsy.comSubject: Bitcoin100 looking for charities to donate to Hi. Not sure if anyone from our group has contacted you yet. We are a "charity collection" organization of 100 people (not there yet but growing) with the purpose of getting charitable organizations to accept donations in Bitcoin as a way of spreading awareness about Bitcoin. Basically, we ask that charities add a Bitcoin donation option to their page, and in exchange pledge a 100 Bitcoin donation deposited almost immediately (currently worth about $300). If you are interested, we can help you set up a system where donations will instantly be converted to USD and automatically deposited into your bank account. The benefits are that no one can freeze your account, and you can get donations in any amount from anyone in the world. The transaction and exchange fees are small, too (less than that of PayPal), and the system works great with micropayments, without $0.30 fees eating up donations. If no one else ever donates after this, at the least you will get about $300 for a little bit of work. Please let us know if you are interested. Thank you. Rassah Bitcoin100 |
|
|
|
Another option is quid-pro-quo: Ask these guys how much they'd be willing to evangelize Bitcoin after their shitty experience with PayPal, and us donating a bunch of money. If their group is willing to embrace us, I'd say go for it, but if all we get is just a bitcoin address in the donation page, I think other charities would be way more worthy. Sorry for putting such a "heartless" spin on this, but this is other peoples money we're planning to throw around. I don't want it being wasted. EDIT: On the other hand, Regretsy is saying that PayPal is working with them is still PayPal PR BS http://t.co/CPoADocW Maybe it's worth pursuing this still. |
|
|
|
Saying something is "the people's" implies that it was created or is owned by some sort of collective. Bitcoin was created by people, not "the people". It was not created by a government, so do not confuse people by implying it was.
The government is not the will of a collective. A collective doesn't even think feel nor have a will in the first place; only individuals do. Non-sequitur. Additionally, a recognized government isn't the only means to establish change. Remember, an action is only the result of the winning desire that overcomes all that oppose it. The fact is Bitcoin benefits all people by allowing its price and distribution to be affected solely by the will of the people and not the whims of a powerful elite nor collusions in monopolies on power. It is the people's currency more than any other money. I think the point is that by now, the term "The Peoples'" is just as tarnished as the terms "Democratic Republic of," or "liberal" and "conservative." Regardless of what the true meaning of the words is, its extremely hypocritical use by certain groups will for ever make us think of those words in terms of their hypocricy rather than their actual meaning. |
|
|
|
I voted as a lot before reading that things like mutual funds are considered liquit. My a lot is based on percentage of my cash savings, in which case it's most. If compared to my stock holdings, thanks to the slide down from $17, not so much |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
