Seems good, despite the fact that you could still sell your voting right to someone else...
Yes because you retain the private key you can prove you voted for X. So the system breaks down.
|
|
|
Why would you need money for a *school* project.
|
|
|
There is no floor on the Zimbabwe dollar. It remains to be seen if there is a floor on the Argentine peso. Bitcoin's floor is in the third world where it promises to replace cell phone minutes and bullets as a currency in Africa and reduce foreign currency fees for Assam tea traders. Maybe Brad Delong cannot think outside the USA's borders but bitcoin is bigger than that. *edit* here is a link to the 10 year chart of the Argentine peso v USD on xe.com. As you can see, the value of the Argentine peso is exponentially shrinking: http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=ARS&to=USD&view=10Y
|
|
|
It would be very helpful if someone is able to get a copy of the insurance policy wording so we could look at it.
|
|
|
My house, my car, my life, my income, my health are all insured.
Why wouldn't I want to insure my bitcoins? I didn't write Armoury. I have no way of knowing that their seed can be trusted. And some random person's opinion on an Internet forum is unlikely to change that.
At least I can sue the Lloyd's names. I sincerely doubt that the creator of Armoury has sufficient assets to cover losses if the program is found to be fatally flawed for some yet to be determined reason.
|
|
|
Is the community going to take back bitcoins every time it doesn't like someone?
|
|
|
Yeah if it is just a spread off bitstamp and the spread varies whether the marine is low fiat / high BTC or vice versa than that sounds perfectly sustainable and not subject to arbitrage (except as an arbitrage play against Bitstamp).
|
|
|
I am most definitely not a mathematician. But I don't think it would work.
I would stand in front of the ATM all day and arbitrage it.
yeah right, with a 3% operator fee on every trade you would do well! also remember, that machine's operator can hedge large trades on an exchange, in real-time. I don't think the original proposal was for the algorithm to be market linked. If so, then that changes things.
|
|
|
If you are worried just make a one use email address and send them the code. They already paid you so no need to delay. If you have confirmations don't see how it could be a double spend just get two confirmations at least.
It's a serious pain in the ass for foreigners to get US iTunes Store credit so that might justify a premium for foreigners.
*edit* key risk to me would be a zero confirmation attack.
|
|
|
What is with the Ripple fanboys and their relentless need to post about Ripple all over the bitcoin forums. It's almost like they are trying to pump up the value of XRP.
I remember this rhetoric before Litecoin became big, and those who used it are now too butthurt to even post on the forums.... I'm willing to gamble that any system that allows people's money to be taken away without their consent or knowledge will never become big.
|
|
|
What is with the Ripple fanboys and their relentless need to post about Ripple all over the bitcoin forums. It's almost like they are trying to pump up the value of XRP.
|
|
|
Maybe.
I can also remember my parents being unable to buy a house despite earning good money in the 1980s because home loans were very hard to get. Houses were more affordable back then but few could pay cash
|
|
|
And in no debt land you cannot get a mortgage so don't expect to own a house unless you inherit it.
Unless no one else has debt also. In which case houses wouldn't be used as speculative assets. Imagine that, affordable houses. In the medieval era landlords accumulated vast tracks of land. Didn't make it any cheaper for the peasants. I already own real estate and rent it out. I'm not intending on selling any of it anytime soon. In fact I might bury it in a trust so my children can't sell it either All trusts in the English speaking world have an end date. It is the law against perpetuity to stop assholes like you from ruining the world for the rest of us once you're dead as a door nail. Correct it is called the Rule against Perpetuities. Except that it no longer applies in most jurisdictions. It does where I live, which all I care about because it is not part of the hell hole wherever you call home if the rule against perpetuities has been revoked over there. Even if it does apply a trust is still good for up to 120 years. Which means assholes like me only need to come along every 4th generation or so. *edit* to be honest I might have been thinking of introduction of the wait and see rule. Anyway I'm not puttin them into a trust soon. I am concerned though that a debt free society could actually be worse for those at the bottom who spend their wages on rent, can never get a loan and so can never get ahead. Bitcoin economics do worry me.
|
|
|
And in no debt land you cannot get a mortgage so don't expect to own a house unless you inherit it.
Unless no one else has debt also. In which case houses wouldn't be used as speculative assets. Imagine that, affordable houses. In the medieval era landlords accumulated vast tracks of land. Didn't make it any cheaper for the peasants. I already own real estate and rent it out. I'm not intending on selling any of it anytime soon. In fact I might bury it in a trust so my children can't sell it either All trusts in the English speaking world have an end date. It is the law against perpetuity to stop assholes like you from ruining the world for the rest of us once you're dead as a door nail. Correct it is called the Rule against Perpetuities. Except that it no longer applies in most jurisdictions.
|
|
|
What is the mechanism that will improve bitcoin's Gini coefficient.
Spending of bitcoins and the inability to sustain one's wealth via debt based inflation. The gini coefficient of bitcoin was 1 five years ago. Deflation means that a dollar not spent today buys more tomorrow.
|
|
|
What is the mechanism that will improve bitcoin's Gini coefficient.
|
|
|
The GFC was partially caused by the Federal Reserve keeping interest rates too low prior to the GFC for far too long after the dot com bubble popped. When they finally pulled on the brakes we lost Bear Stearns and then Lehman Brothers and we have been dealing with the fall out ever since.
So arguably if the Fed had not screwed up badly in 2000 - 2006 we would not be here today.
Which makes bitcoin the grand experiment. Of course bitcoin could also succeed and make the rich very rich and the poor very poor due to its deflationary structure returning the world's workers to the status of serfs to the tech elite. That's also a risk.
No. This is not correct. With bitcoins, to gain economic benefits one must spend bitcoins. The rich will be less rich over time. OTOH, the current fiat system allows rich people to create money out of thin air by getting banks to issue debt. The assets owned by rich people keep getting inflated up, no matter what. Therefore, the rich stay rich and in fact they will become even wealthier over time. That is how the 1% screw the 99%. The gini coefficient in western countries is getting worse. The gini coefficient of bitcoin will improve the longer we use it. Bitcoin is deflationary. By definition you become richer if you do not spend it. If you look at the Gini coefficient within bitcoin land it is worse than real life. If bitcoin goes up another 1000x our whales will be the worlds richest people. Don't tell me bitcoin is egalitarian because it's not. Satoshi will be the worlds first trillionaire if bitcoin goes to 1 million.
|
|
|
And in no debt land you cannot get a mortgage so don't expect to own a house unless you inherit it.
Unless no one else has debt also. In which case houses wouldn't be used as speculative assets. Imagine that, affordable houses. In the medieval era landlords accumulated vast tracks of land. Didn't make it any cheaper for the peasants. I already own real estate and rent it out. I'm not intending on selling any of it anytime soon. In fact I might bury it in a trust so my children can't sell it either
|
|
|
|