Well we should have our own Freenet-like forum! In my spare time I'm learning Java by rewriting the Freenet client's web interface (Fproxy). Once I'm done refactoring the existing code into something sane and readable I very well might start looking for ways to integrate new functionality involving Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
One bitcoin-funded debit cards become available my need to hold dollars in a bank account will be virtually eliminated. If I wanted to I could could convert up to 100% of my traditional income into bitcoins but presently this would require a fair amount of manual intervention.
What I would like to see is a service that assigns me a routing number and account number which I can then give to my employer for direct deposit deposit purposes. Then I'd like for any dollars that are sent to that account converted to bitcoins at a reasonable exchange rate and sent to me.
This can't be difficult technically - are there any laws or regulations that would make it impractical? If not, it would make sense for the payment processing companies especially to consider offering such a service. If a payment processor can get some of the dollars it needs to pay merchants directly from other customers instead of from an exchange it would be result in lower costs for everyone involved.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin definitely does challenge Mise's Regression theorem. In order to emerge as a "money", an asset must already have been demanded for non-monetary reasons. Bitcoin never had an initial non-monetary use.
There are three ways you can proceed with this.
1. Actually, it did have an initial non-monetary use... In its initial form Bitcoin was valued as a sign of geekiness, a demonstration of one's devotion to technology etc etc. From this initial non-monetary seed, a certain degree of moneyness began to attach itself to Bitcoin.
2. No, Bitcoin never had a non-monetary use. It's intrinsically worthless. It's a ponzi scheme. In the short term, people can irrationally bid up the price to some non-zero amount. But in the long term the rational of the regression theorem requires that the price of Bitcoin fall to zero.
3. The regression theorem is wrong.
4. Bitcoin isn't money. It's something new which is better than money. There you go. Now we no longer need to have pointless semantic arguments and can actually talk about something relevant, like what kinds of things can we do now with Bitcoin that we couldn't do before when all we had was money. |
|
|
|
1. Are you really supposed to hand over your full banking credentials to a third party? What would your bank say about that? It's actually not uncommon here. I never do it, but I've seen it before on non-scam sites. |
|
|
|
You have a public key (like a bitcoin address) and a private key (every public key has a corresponding private key to sign transactions with). The public key would represent your "username", only the beholder of the private key would be able to post on the forum. Every message in the forum made by the users must be encrypted/sign with their private key, and a corresponding public key is given with it. This ensures that everyone posting a message, is who he truely claims he is. Every user who made more then hundred posts gets the ability to rate other.. -> Each person has a "community rate" which is all the rates given by other people to the this person accumulated. --> This could be used to filter out scammers and cheaters, people who harm others will get a lot of negative rates. Other who have done a lot of good things will get rewarded by a good rate, and get more trusted. -> To counterfeit people abusing this system to harm others with a spam of negative rate we must add a minimum of 100 reached posts and mayve to even make it harder the user should have atleast 10 good rates himself before getting the ability to rate others. We could incorporate this into the blockchain. So not only transactions are stored in it, but also forum-messages. -> We could take advantage of the network hashing power to relay messages. -> Blocks only get produced every 10 minutes, so the posts get delayed. --> Using a alt-coin that produces blocks fast can solve this though. Private messaging can still be done. Every user has a public and private key, now to enable private messaging we must generate another key-pair. So we generate another key-pair and this time we give out the PRIVATE KEY TO EVERYONE. This gives people the chance to encrypt their message with the given private key and it can only get decrypted by the public key which we keep. Any input on this?  It's called Web of Trust. https://wiki.freenetproject.org/Web_of_Trust |
|
|
|
It's disheartening to want to be something you can never be and to have to do things that are against your ideals.
I've got this addiction to life and it makes me do terrible things. I'm trying to figure out what your ideals are because what you originally said reads like "I want other people to give me stuff for free but unfortunately they won't unless I trade them something of equal value". |
|
|
|
I aim to be a socialist but living in a capitalist world requires me to make money to survive. Can you explain what this means? I've tried to figure it out but every possible interpretation I can think of is either incoherent or malicious. |
|
|
|
All of that's fine if you're organising the recording of something yourself. When you're invited to appear on someone else's turf, you don't usually get to call the shots regarding camera angles, lighting or anything else unless you're a mega-star. It looked like the interview was talking place via Skype, so it was definately Yankee's camera that was recording him. |
|
|
|
Forget legal council. Laws change on a whim if you haven't noticed. Voluntary trade is under attack. We need to quit asking for permission to do business. We can do that on Tor. I think Tormail is a good example to follow. They have their main servers hidden somewhere, and the public-facing website at tormail.org is a vps that's running nothing more than a Tor node and a copy of socat. |
|
|
|
To be more clear, how could BTC reduce the unemployment? It allows people to operate businesses that would otherwise not be profitable or permitted due to government-enforced economic oppression. |
|
|
|
|
Bad camera angles distract from the quality of the interview.
Next time you should position your camera in such a way that when you're looking at the interviewer you're also looking at the camera.
|
|
|
|
Someone needs to start up an alternative site. I think it's called Silk Road. |
|
|
|
|
Does this forum have a facepalm smiley?
|
|
|
|
Either someone donates a whole bunch of BTC into Iran and finds a way to randomly distribute them similar to mining (which at current difficulties + USD prices is not really an option there) so they can bootstrap or there's another way how to exchange goods/gold/iranian money for BTC that we need to establish and haven't thought about yet. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remittances |
|
|
|
None of this will help until there is an easy way of buying bitcoins relatively instantly.
This whole concept of having to wire money across the globe and wait days for funds to clear is a major obstacle. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=83209.0 |
|
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure /r/Bitcoin on Reddit reached <80,000 subscribers a long time ago. The very instant it was created, in fact.
|
|
|
|
|
Why did Reddit get a Bitcoin-tipping bot before this forum got one?
|
|
|
|
But I still wonder what is the incentive for a "dispute resolution organization" to exist. Let's say I'm totally wrong, and my view that they take all the risk and get none of the reward is a little overboard. Why aren't dispute resolution organizations popping up all over the place? They sound like a lucrative alternative to costly and ineffective litigation. Are you asking why private competition doesn't spontaneously arise in the presence of a state-enforced monopoly? Some authors have proposed a DRO model as a possible solution to the problem of how to respond to contract disputes, but at this point it's just an idea. The important part is to recognize the need for solutions that don't involve recourse to the state. This problem has to be solved statelessly one way or another for Bitcoin to be successful. We now have the capability to send payments instantly across international borders, but if you rely on government court systems for dispute resolution you'll quickly run into the problem of mutually incompatible legal systems, or one or more parties residing in countries where the legal system is corrupt, slow, non-existent or otherwise unavailable. Saying that there is no solution other than relying on the courts is not a solution, it's a method of avoiding the need to look for one. To make the commerce Bitcoin makes possible actually work you need to change the parameters of the problem space. Take recourse to the court system off the table since it's not available to all participants and search for alternatives. I think the solution set is going to fall into two basic categories: 1) preventing disputes from happening in the first place, and 2) designing systems where the participants have more economic incentive to cooperate than to cheat. This probably means that viable Bitcoin business models look nothing like their traditional equivalents, since those models were built under a different set of assumptions. |
|
|
|
Specifically, if you hold paper USD, it appears on the liability side of the Fed's balance sheet. If you hold a USD bank deposit, it appears on the liability side of a private bank's balance sheet.
Good point. Are most of world's government currencies today like USD in this way? Any important exceptions? I think they more or less all are, yes. There are a few places like Switzerland where a partial gold backing of the central bank's paper is required; I recall the Swiss People's Party proposing that the required ratio be shortened from 1:6 to 1:5, in other words, the Swiss National Bank would have to hold reserves in physical gold equal in value to one fifth of the market price of issued francs. That's the problem with government currencies. Even if they promise to restrict the quantity via backing they can break that promise at any time, and the holder has no recourse. |
|
|
|
|
@killerstorm Those are good suggestions. I wonder why so many people are prone to the saying, "There is no way to solve social problems other than the methods in place now" instead of saying "What new solutions can we invent now that previously-applicable constraints have been removed?"
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
