|
bitcoins are also concealable whilst still remaining highly portable ... try that with 1 kg of gold.
Point being there are also other properties that market desires that may not covered by the traditional definitions of good money relative to the current era of technology or rogue govt. financial tyranny. Need to rewrite some of those textbooks methinks.
|
|
|
|
|
That's obscene ... how long until leaks about how this information is being traded on the black market for the goons self-enrichment?
So much for privacy ... oh wait they are catching the "terrorists", uh-huh .... fall for that one did ya?, idiots.
|
|
|
|
I would be willing to participate to the development of open-source code so that pretty much anyone with a server / VPS could operate an exchange with calculated risks. The inter-exchange part of this is the awesome part of the project of course :-)
I am aware of some OSS trading engines, anyone has experience with them? Who else thinks it would be worth the effort?
Pretty much already exists ... needs some further operational testing, user-friendly GUI client/server interfaces ... go nuts  https://github.com/FellowTraveler/Open-Transactions |
|
|
|
|
They could sell options on future mining supply I suppose, forwards contracts.
But any company who allows shorting of bitcoin would have to treated with the highest degree of caution. (Bitcoinica?) Do not leave/deposit your bitcoins with any type of company or operation that allows bitcoin shorting unless you are highly aware of what you are doing.
|
|
|
|
Huge! Can't believe more bitcoiners haven't picked up on this ... futures market for bitcoin from the establishment financial world, incl. |
|
|
|
I've recently been wondering about a possible future dynamic. Consider the possibility that bitcoin (or crypto-currencies in general) begin to take an appreciable share of monetary market flows to such an extent that CB's of the world really begin to notice. What is the one asset that they could use to compete? Gold. The Central Banks still have thousands of tons (30k?) of the stuff and while they may have been abusing that asset by suppressing it's market value to enhance their other less desirable paper and digital crap token products they still do have an affiliation with gold, as a last resort. Is it it really so inconceivable that the bitcoin phenomena may cause the CB's to start coming in behind gold and supporting gold usage just so that have any kind of relevance in the future? They will end their gold price suppression schemes and actively try to promote it back into the money supply and commercial use or become totally irrelevant. I want to see CB's issuing gold-backed anonymous digital tokens, aka gold digital cash, just to compete. At that point we will have succeeded anyway. All it needed was a little fair competition to flush out the rats and chumps. |
|
|
|
Yep. The crux of the whole matter is alluded to in this article. The essence of capitalism, the accrual of capital as savings for purpose of future investment, is seriously undermined or simply dysfunctional when built upon debt based money which is designed to erode capital (savings). One of the crucial points Hayek was making in his short article : https://mises.org/daily/3204If we start on this soon we may indeed achieve a position in which at last capitalism is in a position to provide itself with the money it needs in order to function properly, a thing which it has always been denied. Ever since the development of capitalism it has never been allowed to produce for itself the money it needs; and if I had more time I could show you how the whole crazy structure we have as a result, this monopoly originally only of issuing gold money, is very largely the cause of the great fluctuations in credit, of the great fluctuations in economic activity, and ultimately of the recurring depressions. I think if the capitalists had been allowed to provide themselves with the money which they need, the competitive system would have long overcome the major fluctuations in economic activity and the prolonged periods of depression. At the present moment we have of course been led by official monetary policy into a situation where it has produced so much misdirection of resources that you must not hope for a quick escape from our present difficulties, even if we adopted a new monetary system. |
|
|
|
are you really a girl? i think you would be the second one we've seen around here ... no wait maybe the third ...
- snip -
Why would you ask that, and why should it matter? Are you twelve? Silly question. Silly question deserved a silly question ... hint: i'm not 12. Edit: and you are all being trolled for your testosterone, lol. |
|
|
|
He's just this guy, you know?
Yeah, just some guy on the internet, ya know? |
|
|
|
|
are you really a girl? i think you would be the second one we've seen around here ... no wait maybe the third ... or are your just trolling to get a rise?
Volatility maybe an issue now, but it is improving (note you need to consider daily swings not weekly or monthly for what people are using bitcoin for is relative). Also you are discounting the other desirable monetary properties, privacy, censorship resistant that outweigh the volatility for the target market to bootstrap it to those sunlit stable greener uplands of monetary nirvana.
|
|
|
|
|
1 bitcoin = 100 MegaSatoshi
how hard can that be?
|
|
|
|
Stop complaining about features we don't have yet (especially when some of those features we do have). Bitcoin is still in beta, not even version 1.0 yet. You misunderstand me (not complaining about lack of features) and agree with me at the same time. Bitcoin needs a much more decentralised dev. structure before it comes out of beta or it will collapse in heap when the training wheels come off. At a minimum, we need a true blue team to compete, so the reds don't miss something or go off on a tangential group-think phase, just imho. Green, yellow and purples would be preferable but hey. There is also going to be too much pressure on too few brilliant, young minds, they'll blow, seen it a few times and its ugly. That is just the technological side, throw in hundreds of millions of money to the brew and it gets pretty heady ... Read this to get a feel for some of the challenges. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Soul_of_a_New_Machine |
|
|
|
Dunno, seems sensible to me. Systems were hacked, who knows if there isn't some nice backdoor still running on the servers just waiting for a chance to cash out from the hot wallet.
Alll of the important Linux systems I've built have been scripted. Thus, I can re-image a host which I have any concern about in a matter of minutes, and I often keep checksums of every file on a virgin system. On BSD systems I can and have re-build world on just an unexplained re-boot just in case. And none of my systems are even sensitive enough to hold passwords, much less financial data. I don't even consider myself a competent system administrator! The skill level demonstrated by most Bitcoin related 'businesses' is simply appalling to me, particularly since there is a financial component. No wonder fucking near every one of them has been hacked. Hey want to do a bitcoin start-up with me? .... You sound like just the guy I'm looking for. |
|
|
|
|
Might be interesting to have a kind of bitcoin bond held in a 1-of-2 signature address against the account to reduce the trust required on the user side.
Say like user has $20k in stock positions in their account then there is a btc 1-of-2 address with $2k worth of btc (10%) that has both user and tor-broker as signors ... or something like that, maybe use a 3rd party independent arbiter as signor for 1-of-3 multi-sig so that either party can get the bonded funds out if it all turns to custard.
|
|
|
|
Top comment on the article is so very, very typical of ZH It it ain't in your pocket, you don't own it.
Bitcoin = Ponzi So by that logic, he doesn't own anything on his hard drive just because he can't put the 1s and 0s in his pocket. The tangibility argument, ah well. I've tried arguing toward metalheads that bitcoin was tangible (in the spirit of sunnankars Why Bitcoin is tangible. Doesn't work, you just get accused of philosophy or word-bending. I then tried to talk to them about why tangibility was important for preservation/guarantee of persistent ownership (because you can effectively deny access) and that this feature of tangibility was also given with bitcoin. Didn't work... Bitcoin was still "worse than fiat". Now I have a nice counter-argument and I will say something like: "watch out, you better put your secret thoughts in your pocket quickly, otherwise I might steal them from you" (think brainwallet). I still have to work on the specifics, but thanks for the idea, Logik. So you don't own your private thoughts?Just ask them for what price they will sell the password and login details to their on-line bank account and/or stock-trading account, etc. Since such details are not tangible and they cannot hold them (in their pockets or otherwise) those things must be worthless by their own logic. |
|
|
|
Wired Magazine has been dethroned. Economist, FT, and Felix Salmon are the new "axis of evil". Or, perhaps, "axis of stupid".
I think it is great to see these highly-respected and "august" institutions finally engage in the debate ..... why? Because we can finally see how weak-minded, ill-informed, irrational and uneducated are the writers and editors who pretend to be "economists" of these financial rags Something I've suspected for a long while but great to see them hang themselves in print ... as the old saying goes, "give them enough rope .... " No need to wonder any longer why the global banking system, finances and economies are in such a shitty state, their thinking and ideas are wrong and rotten to the core. It is merely systemic dysfunction bearing its fruit. |
|
|
|
You just showed with this bad attempt of irony that you're not really aware about SPV.
BitcoinJ is a SPV node, which already uses bloom filters. MultiBit and Android Wallet are two clients which use BitcoinJ.
Oh wait, you mean the java client put out by none other than Mike Hearn, the bitcoin dev. who is pushing hardest to raise the block limits, is really the only SPV implementation out there? Gosh, wait is that a coincidence or irony, or you got me confused with someone else? |
|
|
|
hey, you guys stop discouraging TT. he's doing yeoman's work.
I would just persuade the ZH's guys by giving them a bitcoin tip for cleaning my toilets. chuckles, they can lick the bowls after the alpha geeks get a good feed ... I've given up on them, they had fair warning, same same as the know-it-alls on slashdot, in fact it seems a v. similar mentality is blocking them from looking into bitcoin, albeit from a totally different field of expertise. Neither ZH or slashdot people are stupid but their arrogance or something seems to have blocked their minds .... but you can only slap people across the face with a wet fish so many times before you realise they will never wake the eff up. |
|
|
|
|
Any ETA on when these mythical SPV node solutions will be hitting github?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
