1 orderd by VinceSaimos - took 5 weeks to arrive - working ok.
Point of information - it took Ken 5 days to ship after I paid, and I think 2.5 weeks in total to arrive. Because it's shipping to the UK and UK customs are slow as shit. It's not "working ok" - it's performing like a champion! Over spec on the hash-rate and 100% stable I've now ordered two gold rush cards which took ken 1 day to ship after I paid, they haven't arrived yet. Vinny, the one that took 5 days to arrive? That one's not working  Try telling the whole truth -- you'll be surprised how good it feels! ... calling it a night. this is much more of a pain than I was expecting. I have 1.5TH sitting around that I cant use. i'll try again tomorrow.
|
|
|
|
Re. "arbitrary unit": Not intended as technical jargon, simply as "arbitrarily chosen unit." I'm from Russia, we use the metric system, the troy ounce sounds as archaic and anachronistic to me as cubit would (i'm guessing here) sound to you. Further, unlike gram, which is the basic unit of mass in the metric system, the ounce is one of many units of mass in the imperial system (you don't have miliounces, kiloounces etc,. etc -- you have grains, pounds etc., etc). So you might as well go for grains. Or pounds. Or cubits. Re. " For every 1 unit of Bitcoin (that is 1 BTC, 100,000,000 satoshis) in existence, there are 457 troy ounces of gold in existence.": That's fine. For every Satoshi there's 470/100,000,000 troy ounces. The equation remains correct, it represents the same thing, only with Satoshi as the basic unit of Bitcoin, Bitcoin is suddenly 100,000,000 times more common. See why I want to keep BTC instead of bit as a standard? Don't devalue muh Bitcoin   |
|
|
|
OK. But behave yourself.  |
|
|
|
|
So... Not "digital gold"?
|
|
|
|
Sure, if Bitcoin becomes world's only currency, it will have the market cap of all world's currencies combined... Wait... oh, you know what I mean  Re. altcoins: Fiat world thinks Bitcoin's an altcoin. |
|
|
|
...
The true criterion should be the market cap. If we look at the market cap now and what it could be it's clear that bitcoin is in its infancy.
... My Clonecoin's current market cap is tree fiddy. It could be trillions. Interested? |
|
|
|
...
You guys miss the point..... Bitcoin is commonly sold and the price is quoted in units of 1BTC, gold is commonly sold and the price is quoted in units of troy ounces.
In that case, I'm 100% against switching to bits or Satoshi -- Bitcoin would suddenly become much more common. If units like BTC and Satoshi exist side-by-side like they do today, Bitcoin remains a paradox -- Incredibly rare and incredibly common at the same time.  How rare is one bitcoin compared to one troy ounce of gold? Please do tell me the proper method for coming up with an answer to that question. I would love to see if you come up with something different than what I did.
You determine the amount of radiation in the number "5," multiply that by obesity, and factor out love. Seems obvious. Also, I am attempting to establish rarity based on the total existence of something.
Lets say for example you are locked in a room... outside the room nothing exists, the only thing that exists is what is inside the room... follow me? good...
Now lets say in this room you have 100 oranges and 10 apples. How much more rare are apples than oranges? Apples are ten times rarer than oranges right? Does it matter that you can cut an apple into pieces? Does it matter that you can stack 100 oranges into a crate? no... there are 10 times more oranges in existence than apples.
The problem with this analogy is you're comparing numbers to numbers -- countable apples to countable oranges. This is handy if you hand them out to kids, but becomes irrelevant if you do other stuff, like sell them by weight or make jam. Then you no longer care about count and start worrying about weight. If the apples in the room are huge, and oranges puny, then apples suddenly become more common. I'm comparing quantities in existence, doesn't matter if gold and bitcoin can be combined or melted down, I'm talking one troy ounce of gold, how many exist on the planet, and one bitcoin on the bitcoin network how many exist on this planet.
Then what you established is the ratio of arbitrary units, the number of BTC vs. oz. of gold. Since both units are arbitrary, this relationship has rather limited usefulness. All you logic geniuses please show me the proper way to establish a baseline of how rare one bitcoin is to one troy ounce of gold if you think I'm so wrong.
Not all well-formed formulas have solutions, but that's not relevant here. You start with a formula that is not well-formed, and you demand an answer. How many 6 yellow is with forty-five then inside? |
|
|
|
...
I agree with your sentiments about credit worthiness. Just don't see what that has to do w fractional vs full reserve lending. I'm arguing that FRB is necessary when demand exceeds supply.
I think his point is FRB does not solve every problem of finance, and I agree. Lending money indiscriminately, to everyone who asks, is a bad thing. Just look at bitcoin securities and this forum's lending section |
|
|
|
...Anyway, almost nobody believes the made up unemployment numbers coming from the .gov, just like few believe the hocus pocus inflation numbers calculated with ever changing components, but generally less food and energy(due to volatility). ...
When I need irrefutable facts, I rely on the guy wearing that hallmark of credibility -- teh tinfoil hat. |
|
|
|
Human population growth is exponential. Economic growth needs to be exponential just to keep up Actually, the serious problems certain States are having, like Japan and Europe, are derived from a slow decrease of their active populations and expected negative grow of their general populations. That is going to bankrupt social systems and to provoke liquid creation of money/inflation or sovereign defaults. Even China and India have the grow of their populations under control. India is having about two babies per women, China is having much less than that. China is going to have serious problems because of a decrease of their active population and huge numbers of old people. Population is going to keep growing because of increase of life expectancy and because of Africa, that is still growing fast, but the population is going to decrease in Europe and other developed countries. Projections are pointing for about 9 or 9.5 thousand millions around 2050 and then a decrease that might be fast. You're right, the rate of increase of the rate of increase is easing off, but current birth rate is still more than double current death rate. ...The human population could follow an s-curve (reaching an equilibrium), be limited by some catastrophic event and resume exponential growth (major war, natural disaster -- stay in dynamic equilibrium), or be extinguished by a catastrophic event (okthxbi). Examples of similar scenarios abound in nature and thus are (by definition) perfectly natural...
http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/ |
|
|
|
...I feel it's an important distinction as only federal government can conjure currency from thin air.
Dude! Did you hear 'bout Federal Reserve, the sneaky non-gobmint bastards? |
|
|
|
Hyper is over 30% inflation per month I believe so there is only one real cause, excessive production of irrefutable bank notes... Or people losing faith in the banknotes already printed. Hyperinflation is a runaway condition, seldom intentional. The evol bankers don't want it to happen any more than the people holding the notes |
|
|
|
...In a free market system, the cost of money(interest rates), would be set by the market...not a bunch of un-elected banksters in a privately owned cartel pretending to be government officials. ... These bankers are a part of, and a creation of, the free market. Financial institutions and regulations were all created by the free market adapting to changing environment. ...unless you think that aliens brought us bankers and regulations. |
|
|
|
...
Human population growth is no longer growing exponentially, in some countries like Japan they're actively trying to stimulate the population to make more babies because they know otherwise it will be much harder to keep growing the earth's cancer economy to keep up with their debt burdens and accompanied interest. Do you believe this is actually a healthy and natural thing? Honest question.
Not sure what you are asking. What is "healthy and natural"? Healthy and natural for whom or what? It's perfectly healthy and natural for yeast to snack on sugar and shit out alcohol, multiplying exponentially until alcohol kills off the entire yeast culture. We thank the critters for delicious booze. Examples of this in nature are common as dirt. The human population could follow an s-curve (reaching an equilibrium), be limited by some catastrophic event and resume exponential growth (major war, natural disaster -- stay in dynamic equilibrium), or be extinguished by a catastrophic event (okthxbi). Examples of similar scenarios abound in nature and thus are (by definition) perfectly natural. Economy is also not static, it's not even an entity. It exists in constant flux, changing everything about itself. Like a living culture, it can follow any one of the scenarios described, and then some. Bitcoin is one of the things affecting economy. |
|
|
|
...
If all Apple trees go extinct and you held the last apple on earth and there was no possible way to reproduce it. How much would that Apple sell for?
Infinity or world's entire money supply. But only to a true apple fancier  |
|
|
|
WTF am I reading? Weirdass extrapolation from statements made by the guy who wrote The Population Bomb in the '60s (mostly shown wrong since), and an ex-chairwoman of some Canadian agency disbanded in the early '90s (had to look both of them up). What are you trying to say? Say it in your own words. |
|
|
|
^Miz4r suggested that exponential growth is unsustainable. I replied that human population growth is exponential. Not everything in this thread is about you. Consider taking part in the gubmint brainwashing program -- huffing gas may have seemed like a great alternative to education, but look how shit worked out... <ignorant troll ignored>  Re. your edit: Your posts could be accurately described as "not even wrong."While mostly grammatically well-formed, your posts fail to meet the same criteria at a logical level, thus responding with anything other than "lol" is a fool's errand. |
|
|
|
^Miz4r suggested that exponential growth is unsustainable. I replied that human population growth is exponential. Not everything in this thread is about you. Consider taking part in the gubmint brainwashing program -- huffing gas may have seemed like a great alternative to education, but look how shit worked out... |
|
|
|
I'm also critic of the FR, but from a formal point of view it doesn't destroy the link between credit and debit. One man debit is another man/entity credit. So at which point is the "money" to repay the interest on a debt created? Since all fiat money is created out of debt (the central bank creates money by lending to banks or, in certain countries, directly to the State), interest creates new debt that can only be paid by borrowing more, supposedly supported in future income grow (think about corporations). And where does that 'growth' come from? And doesn't the compounding interest on ever growing debt require exponential growth, instead of just linear growth? Is that even sustainable in a finite world with finite resources? Could it be that all our financial and even climate change problems are related to this? I think the answer is yes, but I'm sure someone here will argue it's not and everything is fine... Human population growth is exponential. Economic growth needs to be exponential just to keep up  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
