Centralization, in and of itself, isn't a necessarily a bad thing. In fact, it could create a larger user base and instill trust in the system for the common man. Bitcoin would simply cease to be the Mecca currency for liberals and anarchists. For Bitcoin to reach truly great heights it can't be exclusively used by the annual Porcfest attendees. It makes perfect sense for businessmen to want as large a user base as possible. That will require at least some control by a central authority.
Given the results of the Ron Paul campaign, I estimate the freedom movement potentially consists of 5-10% of the US population. This is about 7.5 to 15 million adults in the US alone. This is way more than enough to form our own economy, build our own businesses within our community, and have our own decentralized money and banking systems. We do not need to dumb down and centralize Bitcoin to attract a larger audience out of the vast pool of mass media manipulated Borg drones of the corporate state who have been responsible for destroying the country for the last 100 years. It can grow organically into an ecosystem at a steady pace as it is with a quality user base. I would estimate another potential 20-40% of the population may follow as they see the initial users prosper. There is another 50% of the population for which there is probably no hope since they are dependent on maintaining the status quo at all costs. I know I will lose complete interest in Bitcoin if it is 'Paypaled' into near uselessness. I'm not sure you can classify every Ron Paul supporter as a Bitcoin supporter but maybe. Bitcoin will have a really difficult time being used by the non "Borg Drone" crowd if U.S. businesses fail because that business is driven underground. I do agree that you and many like you will stop using Bitcoin. I already said that above. |
|
|
|
Thanks for this sad news. This was the main reason for my 0.20 btc membership fee.  The intent behind the sign up deadline was to prevent someone from stuffing the ballot box; membership is cheap but foresight is not. We didn't want someone spending a months salary and buying the election. Since you're obviously tied into the decision making at the foundation, can you tell me why so many people want a German to head up a U.S. Bitcoin business organization? Joerg Platzer probably has an incidental interest in seeing Bitcoin spread worldwide. Other than that, I can't see the reason for supporting him. He's the only one who finds the decentralization of bitcoin a very important thing to keep. The other members are more open to centralization for bitcoin, which is in my opinion a danger to bitcoin. Centralization, in and of itself, isn't a necessarily a bad thing. In fact, it could create a larger user base and instill trust in the system for the common man. Bitcoin would simply cease to be the Mecca currency for liberals and anarchists. For Bitcoin to reach truly great heights it can't be exclusively used by the annual Porcfest attendees. It makes perfect sense for businessmen to want as large a user base as possible. That will require at least some control by a central authority. The point is: No central authority call be trust. The whole concept / fundamentals of bitcoin are built upon that no one even bitcoin itself can not be trust. Only the decentralization can protect this concept. Central planning / banks were the reason Satoshi built this thing. http://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdfI understand and I'm not disputing the above statement. I also agree that foundation membership is made up of members of this forum so it's multinational. Platinum and silver members are mostly running U.S. based businesses and the largest investors in the membership like the Bitinstant (Winklevoss twins) and Bitcoinstore are going to attempt to set the agenda based on the needs of U.S. based businesses. Mark Karpeles, even though he's a frenchman running a Japanese business, must understand the value of supporting the business startups in the US. Just because you vote for the president does not mean you will vote on every action that they take on a daily basis. |
|
|
|
Thanks for this sad news. This was the main reason for my 0.20 btc membership fee. The intent behind the sign up deadline was to prevent someone from stuffing the ballot box; membership is cheap but foresight is not. We didn't want someone spending a months salary and buying the election. Since you're obviously tied into the decision making at the foundation, can you tell me why so many people want a German to head up a U.S. Bitcoin business organization? Joerg Platzer probably has an incidental interest in seeing Bitcoin spread worldwide. Other than that, I can't see the reason for supporting him. He's the only one who finds the decentralization of bitcoin a very important thing to keep. The other members are more open to centralization for bitcoin, which is in my opinion a danger to bitcoin. Centralization, in and of itself, isn't a necessarily a bad thing. In fact, it could create a larger user base and instill trust in the system for the common man. Bitcoin would simply cease to be the Mecca currency for liberals and anarchists. For Bitcoin to reach truly great heights it can't be exclusively used by the annual Porcfest attendees. It makes perfect sense for businessmen to want as large a user base as possible. That will require at least some control by a central authority. |
|
|
|
Thanks for this sad news. This was the main reason for my 0.20 btc membership fee. The intent behind the sign up deadline was to prevent someone from stuffing the ballot box; membership is cheap but foresight is not. We didn't want someone spending a months salary and buying the election. Since you're obviously tied into the decision making at the foundation, can you tell me why so many people want a German to head up a U.S. Bitcoin business organization? Joerg Platzer probably has an incidental interest in seeing Bitcoin spread worldwide. Other than that, I can't see the reason for supporting him. Our decision making process was made via a thread on our forum. I coordinated the thread and put the recommendations we made to the board on GitHub. A large fraction of foundation members are not from the US...not sure exactly how many...maybe 30-40%? I think internationalizing the foundation is critical and should be a priority. I suspect that's driving some votes. Yeah, I guess that makes sense. I just see the recent foundation lobbying efforts in Washington and the primary business donors/members as evidence of a U.S. centric organization. It would be in the foundations best interest to move away from that considering the overall government reception in the U.S. for Bitcoin and similar businesses. |
|
|
|
Thanks for this sad news. This was the main reason for my 0.20 btc membership fee. The intent behind the sign up deadline was to prevent someone from stuffing the ballot box; membership is cheap but foresight is not. We didn't want someone spending a months salary and buying the election. Since you're obviously tied into the decision making at the foundation, can you tell me why so many people want a German to head up a U.S. Bitcoin business organization? Joerg Platzer probably has an incidental interest in seeing Bitcoin spread worldwide. Other than that, I can't see the reason for supporting him. |
|
|
|
|
Chase has about 16,000, BofA has about 18,000 and Wells Fargo about 12,000 ATMs. Between just three banks they can cover nearly every major city in the free world. Major networks like Star and Pulse increase that number to over 4 million locations worldwide. It will be all but impossible to compete with that kind of system. If the manufacturing cost of each Bitcoin ATM was $1 then you would need $4 mil in startup costs plus a distribution and maintenance network comprising tens of thousands of employees. The reality is staggering. Billions would be needed to be competitive.
|
|
|
|
|
I have proof that Josh is a gay rapist.
Look at all the men in this thread he's fucked against their will.
|
|
|
|
I do not feel scammed. I ordered Two Jalepenos back SEP 2012. I'd read all the complaint about slow product delivery, missed deadlines and the lot. I assumed a 1 year delivery date from time of order. When the offer was made, I upgraded to a Little SC & paid the difference. I received my Little SC in AUG 2013 (One month earlier than I expected). My Little SC will have paid for itself in about 8-9 more days.
Aside from BFL hardware and custom luxury boats, I can't think of a single thing that you pay for and then receive almost a year later. Help me out here? This is simple long term investment strategy. It is very much like buying and holding stock purchased near the ground floor. I saw a viable but nor quite complete technology. I accepted a time risk with an expected return about 15 months out. This non-off the shelf, specially designed & fabricated product is much more like your custom yacht, plane or vehicle. This product is specialized machinery like a generator in a power plant. It's not a slapdash of video cards poked into some pc skins chewing up power and spitting out BTC. These are sleak pieces of optimized mining equpiment. Well, now we know you're gay because you're happy about getting fucked up the ass. |
|
|
|
There isn't anyone left that really believes this is going to happen, right? Quoted to have a good laugh if when it's there. It will be at least several more months from now, or even several years if the folks at Dropbox are really stupid. But it's going to happen. ← Feel free to quote this too. Sure and I really believe Dropbox is going to start Audiogalaxy back up any day now. Oh, I believe in Leprechauns too. lol |
|
|
|
Bastard, I clicked the link on my iPad before reading the warning. I had to reset Safari to get it to work again.  |
|
|
|
Stupid fucking thread made me lose the game.  |
|
|
|
What's bump spam? Is that a special flavor like honey bacon?  |
|
|
|
... No covert changes could me made that wouldn't be immediately recognized by someone using Bitcoin. Let's say, if TBF were contacted by some three letter agency and attempted to code involuntary address tagging using the send IP with a TOR block it would immediately cause a rebellion. This is the open source concepts greatest strength. It's greatest weakness, of course, is bad code written by people trying to help. Some people will tell you how confusing it would be to simple users worldwide if Bitcoin needed to be forked for some reason. I don't believe that and I think the immediate correction to the large block fork in March proved how easy it would be to fix. The problem won't come in the form of code influence it will be in regulations that fail to promote business infrastructure and cripple Bitcoin in the US. If a great coder sees a flaw in this argument please fill me in. I would love to know if anyone believes clandestine code could be implemented successfully.
I don't think anyone is seriously afraid of clandestine code in an open source project, or at least I'm not. What I'm talking about are forks; FOSS is forked all the time for a variety of reasons, and community <> developer disconnects or big business getting too involved (controlling) are a big motivator. What I'm saying is if the majority or all of the code commits to master are influenced by a foundation without adequate community input or transparent operations, the decreased trust is more likely to cause a situation where we could see two versions of the blockchain with a hard fork between BF supporters and non-BF supporters, in this example. The code can be immaculate, pristine, and still see a fork caused by politics, bickering, or fighting amongst user groups. Any sufficiently large group that feels under-represented by what could be seen as controlling interests can lead to this behavior. The 80%/20% wealth distribution is another example; if you have a continued accumulation and concentration of wealth, and use that wealth to unduly influence the markets, code, whatever - if the richest quintile loses a majority of the lower 4 quintiles to a chain fork, the same problem occurs, fragmenting something you probably don't want to fragment if you are in that upper quintile. All I'm saying is that billing an Industry or trade organization as the 'main body' could be problematic for a variety of reasons that should be considered. I'm also not saying the the foundation has to become a industry lobby group, just that it seems the most likely course given their actions to date. Ok, this makes more sense to me but you're still missing my point. You don't have to worry about the code being controlled because the last thing a politician or regulator will attempt is a scientific solution. They fight with armament and law and can do far more destruction with those tools than any amount of manipulation to the software. Handing over a clear understanding of the system will only hasten the destruction enough to hinder wide spread adoption. Make them work for it. Make them study on their own. While we're waiting for them to get up to speed, sell Bitcoin to the masses and create a real legislative challenge for them in the future. You're not going to stop legislation but you might make them understand well enough to create tightly written and crippling legislation. |
|
|
|
At $85B a month, that equates to $32,793 per second. Sheets of $100 bills consist of 32 bills, thus 10 sheets per second just for the $100 bills. Doesn't leave much time to print the $1, $5, $10, $20, or the $50, let alone the set up time between runs, for the lines are not dedicated as I've just learned off YouTube via some plant manager.
Something doesn't add up! Obviously, "printing" is a metaphor and does not refer to actual physical paper notes. They're just increasing numbers in the bank's servers. Funny that some people insist on calling Bitcoin a "digital currency" while almost every single Euro and Dollar in existence (that is, more than 99%) exists only digital as well. I found some better numbers: http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0774850.htmlHow much money is printed each day? The Bureau of Engraving and Printing produces 38 million notes a day with a face value of approximately $541 million. That equates to $16.23B printed per month. The $85B is the amount of Bonds sold backed by the $16.23B printed. Not a bad racket! Any ideas on how to improve upon the idea? I do not think you are looking at it correctly. like it was mentioned earlier, "printing" is just a metaphor. It is a way of describing how the deficit continues to increase because we keep writing phony checks to cover US obligations. (Like Jace said....Numbers adjusted on FED Reserve Computers) When you pointed out the US government prints $541 million daily in notes, they also remove a sizable amount of worn bills from circulation. The NET is not an increase of $541 million daily because of the printed new notes. What is a NET (negative) is the amount spent causing massive deficit ( http://www.usdebtclock.org/) The US government writes $85 billion dollars per month that they do not have. Essentially borrowing credit today and hoping to repay in the future. Not a bad racket! Any ideas on how to improve upon the idea? LOL...Definitely a racket. They can't continue this forever however because the interest payments will eventually swallow them. Right now, they are spending everyone's future. I love living in the new Roman Empire. Now shut up, stoke the sacred fire and bring me a Vestal Virgin. |
|
|
|
We figured out the benefits of taking minutes (and using Robert's Rules of Order) for meetings in grade school for club meetings, but that's not really the biggest issue, depending on how they move forward.
The foundation needs to decide if they want to be an Industry advocacy group for the rich kids, or a community based group and/or developer network. Putting development in the hands of big Industry puts both Bitcoin and the foundation at risk in my opinion. Bitcoin would be at risk by alienating the interests and trust of the broader user base, and also by putting important code commits at the mercy of a single organization under the influence of a single nation. My opinion is the current structure and membership of the foundation is perfect as a Industry advocacy group, and as such minimal transparency is really necessary - but they need to reject any influence they might have over the code or the appearance of such. Riding the fence does not seem to be a wise move here, and puts them at risk, and puts the base code at risk if they hold significant influence over it.
Developers informing Industry about implementation etc., is a good thing, and likewise Industry informing developers about their concerns is also a good thing. Industry wielding direct influence over code changes puts the entire ecosystem at great risk of Industry insider corruption and government interference. If the code used by the majority of full nodes is under the direct influence of what amounts to just an Industry insider group, bad thingstm can happen. If they can't let go of code influence, and want to run it as an exclusive industry group with secret meetings and such, it could get ugly.
The code isn't brain surgery it's C++ using the boost library. Even with the extreme use of STL, boost and really long functions there are still masses of coders that can understand the nature of any changes that are implemented. No covert changes could be made that wouldn't be immediately recognized by someone using Bitcoin. Let's say, if TBF were contacted by some three letter agency and attempted to code involuntary address tagging using the send IP with a TOR block it would immediately cause a rebellion. This is the open source concepts greatest strength. It's greatest weakness, of course, is bad code written by people trying to help. Some people will tell you how confusing it would be to simple users worldwide if Bitcoin needed to be forked for some reason. I don't believe that and I think the immediate correction to the large block fork in March proved how easy it would be to fix. The problem won't come in the form of code influence it will be in regulations that fail to promote business infrastructure and cripple Bitcoin in the US. If a great coder sees a flaw in this argument please fill me in. I would love to know if anyone believes clandestine code could be implemented successfully. |
|
|
|
Tradehill is likely very interested in a more intimate partnership with a CU which may allow them to bypass MSB licensing... It doesn't make sense for them to simply switch which institution they use for processing and not notify everyone, though.
Jered's not easy to contact. Best bet would probably be for someone curious to go to 20Mission and ask in-person.
I went by 20 Mission a few weeks ago, no one was around and their was a commercial for-lease sign in the window. Are they still around? Pretty sure. Their page was updated not too long ago. http://www.20mission.com/I have to go to Rainbow Grocery tomorrow. While I'm down there I'll try again. Edit: No luck. He's not at either address. Out of town maybe? |
|
|
|
I dunno what is funnier: 1. The fact that the OP is obviously a troll. OR 2. Some of you actually/genuinely believe this is the real Sunny from BFL.  What would be funnier would be if it was the real Sonny and he is sitting with Josh at his computer right now laughing. I can hear him talking, "Hey Josh, look at the thread I made on that stupid forum. I can't get them to send me any more money so I'm just gonna fuck with em now." LOL |
|
|
|
Tradehill is likely very interested in a more intimate partnership with a CU which may allow them to bypass MSB licensing... It doesn't make sense for them to simply switch which institution they use for processing and not notify everyone, though.
Jered's not easy to contact. Best bet would probably be for someone curious to go to 20Mission and ask in-person.
I went by 20 Mission a few weeks ago, no one was around and their was a commercial for-lease sign in the window. Are they still around? |
|
|
|
 what model of gun? It's called a Cave's Lemon Launcher. It squirts lemon juice up to 50 feet. |
|
|
|
|
We need PinkiePie, Matthew and Atlas back. Without them around everybody just wants to talk about Bitcoin, money, government and economics all the time. Boring!
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
