Boy am I glad that nothing can be done even if it were. 


As for your sophistry.. I just love Bitcoin and I also love my bitcoins, but unfortunately I can't eat them, I can't wear them and I can use them as clothes so eventually I will be forced to spend, no matter what game theory says is the smart move, I can survive holding bitcoins and so I will have to spend them. And that right there completely obliterates your delusional theory.


Btw I'd also challenge your assertions that we haven't had any good news.. We had plenty of good news: from wordpress announcement, to bitpay VC announcement, to their customer adoption announcement, to bitcoin-central announcement, to coinbase announcement, to satoshidice announcement, ect ect ect

We had immense progress and a huge amount of good news lately and you better believe we also had a huge increase in user base as evidenced by the volume coinbase is now reaching monthly or the records blockchain.info/mywallet is breaking..

Successfully updated on Win7x64. Reindexing took a 7 hours or so, did it with -dbcache=2000, after it was finished I closed it without a problem and I have since ran it again without that command and it works. I haven't tried sending or receiving anything.


I'd still like to get an answer when, if at all, will there be an option to enter a username and password for a proxy server?

Mwuahahahaha  

Btw are there any plans for adding the option to enter a username and password for a proxy?

I'm going to sticky this for at least 14 days.

For the children!!!111

 

Hahahah that's funny!

Awesome quote!

Bitcoin - a new money system within a first of it's kind technology


I don't see many people emphasize just how ground braking the technology package is and it often leads to many many misconceptions or inappropriate comparisons to past monies or money systems that simply do not apply.

That's a lie.

No one else can have Gavin work for them as the lead dev, no one else can own bitcoinfoundation.com /.org or use the same name. Maybe someone else can start a different foundation but they certainly wouldn't have the same sort of access to the project like Bitcoin foundation does. And without access there is no power and without power there are no donations and without donations there is no foundation so no, people can't just start their own.

It's a group of individuals that think using a creation of the state will protect them from the state's violence. That's all it is.


I don't have a problem with anyone getting their salary, if what they're doing is desired by the market, the market should pay for it. But having a corporation as a middleman has 1 reason and 1 alone. Legal protection.


See Gavin's salary now can be taxed, and Gavin can pay taxes and have a peace of mind about not being pursued by a violent mafia for what they'd deem is their share of his wealth. Had he accepted Bitcoin donations an argument could be made for evasion since how could he ever prove that a certain number of bitcoins is all he got?

And it's not just Gavin who is getting protected. Other big creations of the state like the legal entity that operates mtgox (TIBANNE Co., Ltd.) or bitinstant (BitInstant LLC) are likewise getting protected. Because now their contributions have a paper trail, a "legitimate" paper trail of legal donations that protects them from the same violence. And this is all Bitcoin foundation is.


And I wouldn't even have a problem with it, if only they used a different name, making it clear what this legal entity actually is about especially because it sure as hell isn't about the development of open source code. We didn't need one and look how far we got, that alone proves that point.

But no.. these individuals decided that they want protection and protection is what they got. Mtgox or Bitinstant or any other business could have easily paid developers through independent contracts, they could have hired them to develop open source or closed source code any way they wanted and the market could have accepted that or not. But if they did that, it would have been their responsibility, they would be met with consequences if one of the developments turned sour or caused damage to the market which is again something Bitcoin foundation shields them from, because now their donations are spent by a different legal entity even though it's all the same people and their money funding projects they OKed.

So not only did they want protection from a violent mafia - the people that call themselves the government - they also wanted protection from you, the market.



But again, if only their name reflected this, I'd be perfectly fine with their to Bitcoin's future irrelevant existence. Because then there's no fear of down the road false authority which is really the main reason I detest this legal entity. Someone mistakenly delegating authority to an entity that has no authority outside of their own mere claims.

Call your self Gavin's Bitcoin Foundation or Gavin's foundation for Bitcoin development and you have my blessing to be forgotten you exist. You'll have you're protection and I'll have my piece of mind. Btw Charlie promised such a name change would get proposed in one of their decision making events, so far I haven't heard anything new about it.

Please..   Define intrinsic value without using a circular argument.. You can't. All value is subjective. Even all meaning of words is subjective, so one can very well say bitcoins are fiat money.

But.. if one goes by old traditions of what people most commonly used the word fiat for back when they spoke Latin it's clear bitcoins are not fiat money, because fiat, back then, meant "let it be so" i.e. a command, i.e. a government decree and bitcoins, unlike dollars, certainly do not have value or are used because of a government's decree.

But yes, we can argue like 5 year old idiots whether bitcoins are fiat money, and we can ignore history and claim they are, OR we can focus on what actually matters and what bitcoins actually bring to the table and RECOGNIZE that Bitcoin is a FIRST OF IT'S KIND TECHNOLOGY and comparing it with anything we had up until now is at best inadequate and much more likely just plain old fallacy.



I don't know about you all, but I have decided, at least for myself, that I'm simply not going to take anyone serious who doesn't treat Bitcoin like that. Period. If you are someone who doesn't recognize that it's a first of it's kind technology and not comparable to anything we had before, then "you" are irrelevant and a waste of my time.

Awesome to hear!

I think the idea is to reflate the bubble so people can borrow again against their equity.

Bernanke even said that this is his goal, to reinflate the housing bubble so people can borrow out their new equity and spend it and he is trying to achieve this by purchasing 40bil/month of mortgage securities.

Why swallow, can't you just stick it in up from the rear? 

Inevitably this short term trend will correct and reverse and then people will suddenly find themselves holding more bitcoins that they thought they needed which will fuel a spending/exchanging circle until we find a bottom and repeat the whole pendulum swinging cycle.


The reason this is so hard to picture is because many people falsely think there is a such a thing as an equilibrium.

The reality is an equilibrium is purely theoretical and in practice the market is constantly readjusting. Currently the market is readjusting to a rising exchange rate, which if the demand keeps up might rise for a while longer but there will come a point when we run out of people wanting bitcoins, remember people can't eat them, or wear them, pr live in them and there is a finite number of people, so yes there's a limit to the demand and when we get to it the trend will reverse and the market will continue to correct except now it will correct in the opposite direction where even the correction itself will become a contributing factor to the correction until again people realize they could use some more bitcoins instead of other stuff where the market will again correct. And this will go on and on and on for ever, because there is no equilibrium.

Too bad people are oblivious to what's about to happen.

Maybe the fact that you have to beg people to participate should give you some sort of a hint. 

Devs should post their goals and project and how much work it would require and how much they think they'd need in terms of funds to be able to dedicate themselves to completing that particular project.

Then an escrow could be used where the condition for the dev getting the funds would be him showing he actually did the work.

A system like that is something I think in the long run could work.

Try these:
http://finviz.com/futures.ashx
http://www.goldprice.org/gold-price.html
http://finance.yahoo.com/
http://pigbonds.info/
http://www.netdania.com/Products/live-streaming-currency-rates-foreign-exchange/real-time-quotes/QuoteList.aspx?m=q