What about China's $23 trillion credit bubble?
The whole world is in massive debt, it's fantasy if you think it's just the United States who has a problem.
the United States has the biggest debt, and the biggest trade deficit. its the biggest parasite in the world, consuming 80 billion USD more than it produces every month. A country consuming more then it produces does not make it a parasite. It means that it has the economic "credit" to be able to borrow such amounts and that it's country is stable enough so that other countries are willing to invest in the US. If this was not the case then currency markets would adjust so that the trade deficit would disappear and the US dollar would be much weaker a country that consistently for 20 years consumes more than it produces is by definition a parasite, and the world would have had more goods if it didnt exist because its a consistent burden on the world. Rich men who live off their inherited wealth are parasites? no, but America isn't a rich man. its a deadbeat that owes trillions in debts and yet continues to live beyond its means on borrowed money. A deadbeat is generally considered to be someone who does not pay their debts regardless of their standard of living compared to the standard of living they can afford. The US government has yet to default (not pay) on their debts |
|
|
|
Not all countries have a "weak local currency" currency policy. Some will let the currency freely float against other currencies regardless of what the market does. The only currencies that will have the problem of being too strong are countries that have net exports as their currency will naturally get stronger as they sell products overseas, bring the profits home and buy the local currency.
The problem is what happens when other countries manipulate the foreign currency exchange rate. Do they still follow an off-hands policy or do they intervene in the market? Most will still follow a hands-off policy. When a currency market is intervened in, the impact is almost always temporary as intervention only slows the appreciation of the currency not reverses it over the long term. well boj has caused usdjpy to bottom out... and eurchf is holding above 1.2 for years now... getting pretty cose but I agree... however with jpy i think they will enter a period of inflation (maybe hyper inflation) because of what they did.. i think instead of jpy being so strong it will become super weak because of the choices they made.. there is no happy between now.. they went to extreme measures to do major interventions and now rate is climbing but it will either fall back down or go through the roof to hurt their economy again. Japan has been going through a period of deflation for over a decade now. They are in dire need of inflation. The Japanese government has purchased hundreds of billions of dollars (if not trillions of dollars) over the past 10+ years but the yen still appreciated against the dollar from trading at ~120 yen per dollar to less then ~80 yen per dollar |
|
|
|
I cant say I believe that it really happened.
It is indeed something of a mystery. Nobody from TBF commenting on this thread has seen it fit to validate that the 100K from KnC was made. Or that the 100K from Phinneas Gage was not made. Accordingly I must, give both the benefit of the doubt, and consider them both Platinum Members as of this time. One recognized, but by the somewhat suspect membership and board of TBF. Yet the other, in the best Satoshi tradition, has vanished. This means that only by the logic and algorithms he left behind, may he be understood. Indeed it is quite mysterious. TBF has been a very shady organization for a long time. The fact they have not commented does not surprise me one bit. A lot of their actions and a more then one of their board members really gives Bitcoin a bad name. |
|
|
|
I want to buy USD on the Silk Road with BTC, genuine bills not counterfeit. Would this be illegal in the USA?
Obviously the Silk Road has a bad reputation and 95% of the website is illegal things for sale. I do not see how any laws would be broken by simply exchanging Bitcoin for American dollars, regardless of the website the exchange is conducted on.
So you want to use Silk Road as a BTC exchange? I can't even begin to comprehend why you would do that. If you really have a huge stash of Bitcoin you want converted to USD, go through an OTC exchange instead so you don't move the markets on a Bitcoin exchange. Any time you buy or sell bitcoin you will affect the market in one way or another. If you trade in large enough amounts you will also experience some slippage regardless of where you trade. Say for example you sell 100 BTC in the OTC market, the buyer of that BTC now has 100 BTC they otherwise would not have, so they now will either no buy 100 BTC they otherwise would have purchased on an exchange or would sell 100 BTC on an exchange they otherwise would not have sold |
|
|
|
That is good! Have anybody tried? No. Nobody has tried it. Not even Peter. Please be the first and let us know how it went.  I was joking here because I assumed it must have been tested and be operating as documented, but I recently used the script to broadcast 2 satoshi to the service, and after two weeks they still were not mined. I sent a PM to Peter Todd Oct 5 about the service and the usual time he has seen for inclusions, and got no response even though he has logged in since then. Is there any anecdotal evidence of this working, and if so, when? Based on what I have read about the script, I would think it was designed for a higher value of dust then just two satoshis. It was written at a time when dust was much more of a problem as bitcoin was worth much less so it would be much more efficient to send large amounts of dust to many addresses. I also believe that you must spend entire inputs with the script, not just part of an input in order for it to work properly, so unless you have inputs totaling two satoshi it would not work (as per my understanding). This would also not solve the OP's problem of the dust transactions "spamming" the blockchain as it would not actually remove the TX from the blockchain but rather would remove them from you wallet/address |
|
|
|
|
I would personally turn off this feature as I think there is little reason to visit the forum for the sole reason that someone replied to your topic. To do this you go to profile -> Notifications and email -> When sending notification of a reply to a topic, send the post in the email (but please don't reply to these emails.) [uncheck this box].
Having these notifications would potentially open you up to phishing attacks as someone who knows your email could send you a fake link to the forum in order to capture your email address
|
|
|
|
Thank you very much, and how can I use Armory with TOR?
You will need to have your TOR browser open whenever you are using Armory. You will need to set up Armory to use a proxy to connect, I am not 100% sure on this but I believe the IP address to set is 127.0.0.1 and the port is 9150. Armory communicates with the network via Bitcoin Core so you'll want to set the proxy settings there. This works pretty well; satoshi built Bitcoin Core's proxy support with Tor in mind back in 2009, see v0.2 changelog. Yes, by default Tor Browser's socks listening port is 9150. I believe Bitcoin Core's default proxy port is 9050 (Tor's default port) so you'll want to change this to 9150 if you're using Tor Browser to manage your circuits. Cheers mate, and it's secure? I mean... after what's happened using blockchain + tor I'm quite scared to use TOR anymore... To the best of my knowledge, there's no fundamental weakness in the use of Tor with Bitcoin Core (and, by extension, Armory). Theoretically, thin-clients such as Electrum or MultiBit should be fine too, but I don't know enough about these particular examples to trust them myself over Tor without further research. For best results, you should have at least a basic idea of internet routing and how, Tor, and HTTPS interact. This will help you guard yourself against other ways of losing bitcoins. A worked example: Suppose you want to send some bitcoins to me and I gave you an address in a bitcointalk.org post, say 5 mills (0.005 BTC) to 1J1ikF1fJVDzGKjwzZKnMfyHaguGkpbyug. Can you be sure you're seeing my address? Can you be sure the amount hasn't been tampered with? Does anyone have the power to swap their own address in place of mine? Does HTTPS make a difference? Does using Tor Browser introduce risk? Does changing identity and reloading the page to double-check help? I would say a potential reason not to use a think client via tor is that you have the possibility to have a exit node fake a transaction to an address of yours. This would make you think that you have received payment when you in fact have not, this could result in you releasing goods when you should not have. |
|
|
|
The number of tx per second (and the amount of storage required) is limited by two things; block size and block frequency. We could double tx per second by doubling blocksize or by doubling block frequency. Or we could do both and quadruple it. Of course if we doubled block frequency we'd need to halve block rewards to stay on the same money supply curve.
A lot of the motivation for the 1MB limit was a fear that if it weren't limited we'd have people building gigantic blocks just to clog up the system. If someone with major hashing power started building giant blocks every time he got a block, he could DoS the system just by making the block chain too large for most people to store.
A lot of the motivation for the ten-minute intervals was limiting the amount of storage devoted to block headers.
Increasing block frequency would be beyond a bad idea. It would increase the number of orphaned blocks and reduce the security of the network. It would also do nothing to address the size of the total blockchain. IMO if you are looking for a shorter block time you should look at the many failed altcoins that have much shorter block times |
|
|
|
So blockchain.info wallet is onchain one? Right?
If by onchain you mean that you control the private keys of your addresses and that every transaction associated with these addresses is stored in the blockchain then yes. Nonetheless the term offchain/onchain is mostly used to describe transactions not wallets. There are 'offchain' wallets that are used. There are a couple that wallet services that work is faucets as all faucets do not payout enough to make sending a TX for each transaction for it to make any sense. Coinbase would also technically be an "off chain" wallet as long as payments are made from coinbase customer to coinbase customer |
|
|
|
I don't think “Bitcoin 2.0” means what you think it means.
extra features and technology on the blockchain? Yeah, that's NOT Bitcoin 2.0. That's just technology built on top of Bitcoin, but not Bitcoin itself. Bitcoin is currently at version 0.9.3 (Bitcoin Core, the reference client). The OP is referencing an altcoin, something very similar to colored coins, or colored coins themselves. In reality, they have very little to no extra value above what bitcoin can provide, as there is a very small subset of "things" that can be traded via colored coins. |
|
|
|
|
I like your idea, however I think it would probably be more cost efficient to use a QR code at the checkout register. I would think that the cost associated with purchasing enough "green lights" that are connected to a secure wifi (otherwise someone could fake a TX to the devices) to cover the max amount of inventory that a store will ever have. You would still need to employ someone to take the "green light" off of each product as someone is leaving the store and to program the "green light" when it is placed on a product. I think it would be easier to simply ring up items as they are today and a QR code would be displayed at the checkout and the customer would scan it and send the appropriate amount of bitcoin.
Another issue with paying for each item individually is that you would pay a lot more in TX fees and you would have the issue of having a lot of 0/unconfirmed TXs when paying for everything.
|
|
|
|
Try to contact them, if no response for more than a week, it means you won't get your money back because that ptc site was scam. Then post your tx id on its forum to tell other members that the site going to scam.
I wonder how much good that will do. Are there any PTC sites that are not scams? I remember goofing off with some of these PTC faucets for a while. They all seem so very dodgy. If they monitor the forum at all, they will likely monitor the scam accusations page as many businesses do in order to monitor their reputation. If you open a scam accusation and they see it they could potentially respond and attempt to resolve the issue. I do have a bit of a feeling that the site was a scam as updating a user's balance generally should be automated and if it is not updating then it probably does not have any intention of giving him credit/any services he has paid for |
|
|
|
Wait for openbazaar now imo, i know openbazaar devs may not want to be associated directly with what might be traded in the future on this platform but if it works you have absolutely no central authority to deal with and will likely have a higher chance of receiving a decent item.
I think this would probably have even more scams then SR does. IMO it is very easy to fake trade volume on SR (at least it appears that way based on what I have read on their forums) so it is very difficult to know who you can trust. There are several very trusted members on this forum that can buy your bitcoin from you. Trust on here can be faked, but it is much easier to tell when fake trust is given. There are also a few select members who unquestionably are not faking trust (to a certain extent) |
|
|
|
They can't change their terms unilaterally and seize your coins - that's outright theft.  The terms of almost every business is that the business can change the terms by providing your notice of the change and your continued use of their service is acceptance of the change in terms. The only recourse the OP has is it withdraw his money from BitStamp and trade "locally" Thought OP said the terms changed so he can't even do that. I don't see any mention of the OP not being able to withdraw any balance until then. All the email from stamp says is that the OP has 28 days to provide identification or all the funds in the account will be forfeited. Since it does not say anything to the contrary I would assume that they would allow you to continue to trade, deposit and withdraw until then (IDK why anyone would want to trade or deposit). The email also says that the OP was given multiple warnings prior to this message |
|
|
|
Wow this thread just reminded me, what ever happened to Phinnaeus? Did he say wether he was gOing out did he just vanIsh one day?
He needed a loan from BurtW and used his account as collateral. From the looks of it he has not yet repaid the loan and I would not be entirely surprised if the account has since been sold How much did he get for the account? IIRC it was a 2.5 BTC "loan" It does not appear the loan has been repaid as the account has still not logged in for several months. I would assume at this point that the loan is in default. The account also has much less positive trust then it previously did (I believe it has a lot more previously). Bruno needed two and a half Bitcoins so bad he hocked his account? I find that really hard to believe. He had thousands of btc at one point and multiple ASIC miners. Well he was so reckless with his money that he gave away 100k to TBF only ~6 months ago. He has not logged in for several months and is posting under a new name which is generally accepted to be him. In theory the loan could have been for more, however I hear a rumor that he had posted that he needed 2.5 BTC, then shorter after this Burt had given him positive trust that says he risked 2.5 BTC. I think it is somewhat speculation and somewhat hearsay but I am pretty sure this is what happened. |
|
|
|
Single figures still, I would imagine. While luxury real estate has been periodically offered on this forum and elsewhere, I have heard of maybe one confirmed transaction that has happened
I would think the number of transactions actually completed with bitcoin to be able to be counted on one hand. You are correct that very few real estate sales occur with bitcoin and the likely reason is that bitcoin is no where nearly widely used enough for someone to make a good use for bitcoin so they would need to sell it which would add to their costs |
|
|
|
The computer my bitcoins are stored on has never touched the Internet. The only BTC I keep online are for spending and that would be like someone stealing my wallet from my pocket. It would suck but would not break me.
A lot of people do not grasp this concept. They assume that their money is safe only because "bitcon transactions cannot be reversed because of the blcokchain". People do not understand that whoever has the private keys to a specific address is able to control any money that is "inside" such address. I think a lot of people did not have the "luxury" of seeing money stolen from people who did not have their bitcoin properly secured |
|
|
|
but if companies used "off blockchain" processors like coinbase wouldn't that solve the problem? then coinbase can push transactions to the blockchain when necessary.
This is not how off blockchain transactions work. An off chain transaction is when you deposit money to coinbase (for example), then spend some of that money on some product. The bitcoin that you deposit into coinbase will never move as a result of this transaction however the database of coinbase will reflect the transaction. Then when you go to withdraw the remaining balance of your bitcoin, the input of the transaction will likely be something very different from what you deposited. |
|
|
|
Define the context of offchain. It has different meanings depending on the context.
Offchain is generally considered when you deposit your bitcoin into some third party website/service and trust them to accurately keep track of the balance of your bitcoin. In exchange you will generally be able to instantly transfer money from person to person (instead of waiting 10 minutes for a confirmation), would not be at risk of any double spend attacks (assuming you trust the 3rd party service) and would allow you to avoid a TX fee. The problem with this is that you need to trust some third party with your money. Off chain transactions are clearly inferior |
|
|
|
In your example: When "bank loans 90 BTC to customer B" those can only be tokens representing BTC.
Why must an token be loaned? The bank has 100 BTC. It loans 90 of it. It doesn't need to lend out a token. The banks rely on the fact that loans are eventually redeposited into the banking system. This fact allows banks to lend out as much money as they do. The banks should have enough assets (both cash and money owed to them - loans) to cover all their liabilities (deposits) at any given time |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
