Maybe colored coin can replace an actual stock certificate but who has those anymore?
Think Mastercoin, Sidechains and Ethereum for a few examples of possible implementations A sidechain with a fixed value could easily allow for the flow of assets that have a fixed value back and forth on a blockchain The ledger would record the transactions and miners get the incentive through a merge mine. Mastercoin would raise capital on the blockchain and then have it converted to fiat as happened in the Maidsafe IPO Ethereum promises those things but is still a developers gardenshed with the infrastructure and technology still being made. Do you even trade stocks? Without a market maker who matches orders? How do you do stops, limits and OCOs? Can you see the other bids and ask coming from other exchanges? A side chain could in theory record the transfer of ownership of stocks and the prices (via a public note embedded into the TX) and even the payment for the assets (both parties could sign part of a TX whose inputs are the payment for the asset and the sidechain asset and the outputs would be to an address that the buyer and seller controls). AFAIK there would not really be a way to manage the negotiation of prices |
|
|
|
Good luck paying off all/majority of them. Likely will never happen.
Even if the majority were paid off, it should be obvious to other nodes that the paid off nodes are reporting incorrect information and would not keep these nodes in the network (not accept TXs from them, not relay found blocks and TXs to them). The result would be the paid off nodes would only be connected to each other with no miners processing any blocks to them and the non-paid off nodes running business as usual (there would be less nodes) |
|
|
|
A central bank issuing Bitcoins that defeats the point of Bitcoin and I think they are well aware that bitcoin is superior for sending.
They were better off just saying if the regulatory environment changes around them we would consider using them
Geez they are getting outmoded and falling behind at this rate they might end up being Polaroid unless they build a new model in the next few years.
If you don't adapt you die. Forward thinking business are looking for way to integrate bit coin. The dinosaurs like western union will crumble. I think one of the issues that WU has is the question of taxes. If WU were to exchange fiat for bitcoin and then send bitcoin to a 3rd party, but the exchange rate was "below market" would they need to report income to this person? If they were to sell bitcoin at a premium would they need to report this markup as taxable income? Another issue is that bitcoin itself kind of makes WU obsolete, if you wanted to send someone bitcoin you could just send them the coins to their address instead of going through WU and paying their fees (having to travel to a WU location, show ID to claim funds, ect.). The only thing that WU could really do bitcoin related would be to offer to exchange bitcoin for fiat and/or exchange fiat for bitcoin. |
|
|
|
I really don't like the idea of making any BTC non-fungible. That's a really dangerous precedent. If BTC is really money, then this is not an acceptable course of action, IMO.
This is a very dangerous precedent indeed. If we were to start by blacklisting the "FBI" coins then why would we not black list coins owned by a theif, or by someone who took advantage of others (but everyone agreed to the terms), or someone that had suspiciously good timing? What if you were to simply piss someone off who had enough influence to get a specific address blacklisted? What if a company that accepted bitcoin were to adopt a policy that others did not like, but was still within the bounds of the law? This would make it very difficult for commerce to take place with bitcoin. |
|
|
|
All of these little tidbits of news are great for BTC. Not really because we need google to see the price of BTC, but more so because it just puts Bitcoin in front of more people's eyes. The more recognition it has, the more and more it will be adopted...
This should allow more people to discover and explore bitcoin. Over the long term it should help get more people to use bitcoin |
|
|
|
|
I think the issue with going on a road trip solely on bitcoin is the issue of buying gas as there is not really a way you can go from bitcoin -> gas without first going to fiat. If a family were to go on a vacation then this would be possible as they could book their hotel with expedia, their flight with (I think the site that accepts bitcoin for flights is) cheapair, and find restaurants that accept bitcoin to eat at.
|
|
|
|
Remember Cyprus.
that was not really a bank, now was it. I am talking more about banks such as: Barclays, Bank Of America. Standard Bank, etc. The banks in that country had to restrict the amount of money their deposit holders could transfer to banks outside of the country and essentially gave deposit holders a haircut because the banks as a whole were in such bad shape. |
|
|
|
I don't see the whole currency war thing. Since Nixon ended the gold standard, $Fiat already died long ago and it's been replaced by assets. Very few people have more than 5 digit savings as they put all their money into housing and stocks.
If $USD is replaced by another currency it wouldn't impact assets much. Look at Eastern European and Chinese real estate, their real estate prices rival or even exceed those of many American areas. Changing the Petro Currency wouldn't change any of that.
Technically if Petro Dollar died it wouldn't impact the elites or the asset holders much, but it would probably make life hard for the working poor with no assets and run away inflation would probably make them riot. "When a man has nothing to lose - he loses it"
Most corporations have well over 5 figures in Fiat (usually fiat equivalents like very short term treasury bonds) to pay for operating expenses and when they cannot invest their money without taking on excess risk. People should have at least 6 months of savings if they have a steady job or 2 years worth of savings if they are self employed or hold a non-steady job. Granted most people do not have this, but people that have the means do have this before investing a lot in other assets. |
|
|
|
google wifi drones  The company that spies on us for the government. i meant the concept of flying wifi routers buzzing around the skies of a town. (not specifically requesting them to be google owned) These nodes would need some kind of incentive to operate or else they would not operate. If you were to say that it would give the owner access to the rest of the internet/network, then what if a node operator used much more bandwidth for himself then he relayed for others? Other nodes would not want to relay data packets to him because he is taking much more then his fair share. |
|
|
|
|
The TX fees will likely decrease in terms of BTC overtime as the price of BTC increases. Over time as more people start to use bitcoin the TX fees per block will increase, making the block subsidies less important to miners.
|
|
|
|
Back in the 10,000 BTC pizza days the faucets would give 1 or more bitcoins at least... good times
This was when the purpose of faucets was to help get people interested in bitcoin. Today the motive behind running a faucet is purely profit. |
|
|
|
I think we need to change Bitcoin's algo to MD5. It would be much better for mining...  This kind of a change will only result in an Alt ...because getting mass consensus is almost impossible for Bitcoin now. you can get a consensus to make changes to the Bitcoin protocol as we do get this whenever bitcoin core is upgraded. The problem is getting a radical of a change as this is |
|
|
|
I know I post this a lot, but it bears repeating. Bitcoin is technically a currency, because it is a medium of exchange with current value. And that's all a currency is. But it is not a regulable currency, because it is not backed, it is not claimed to be backed, and it is full-reserve. It cannot be taxed. It cannot be outlawed. So there's no real way to determine the motivation behind this change in wording. But declarations such as these hold almost zero weight in the long term.
Bitcoin is backed by the security of the network via the miners. It is not a very good store of value as the price of bitcoin is not sable as it is not uncommon to double digit percentage swings in the price of bitcoin. On the other hand the dollar rarely sees prices swings that exceed 1% in it's price |
|
|
|
Actually bought tickets two weeks back from Expedia. Won't be wasting BTCs for this, though it does sound cool  They are only accepting bitcoin for hotel rooms (see above). If you didn't want to give up your bitcoin to spend on tickets/hotel room you could simply use bitcoin to buy your room then buy more bitcoin on an exchange so that your overall balance is the same. |
|
|
|
|
All he would really have to do is maintain a low enough profile so that others do not watch every word that he says so he could possibly be connected to him creating Bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
5% does not seem like an outlandish figure. The fact that they are paying out 5% in and of itself does not raise my suspicion.
That said, there is always counterparty risk and security risk. Judging from the tech background of the founders, I would perhaps be less wary of security risk and more wary that some HFT's or other whales find a way to game their platform and leave them insolvent.
I put a teeny bit in there that I can afford to lose.
Would be nice if BTC becomes accepted by a major brokerage that will allow people to trade on margin against it and perhaps buy dividend paying stocks. I called interactive brokers, no dice. Maybe this conversation could be a catalyst for pressuring some of these brokers to do that....
(which they probably won't until the regulatory framework improves-- but it can't hurt to try)
my two cents
If they are paying 5% then at a minimum they will need to earn 5% on the bitcoin you give (lend) them plus their expenses. With current interest rates that is simply too much to earn on investments that must be liquid enough to satisfy demands for payment from investors. |
|
|
|
Mark Karpeles , if he did not commit outright theft and fraud, is at minimum guilty of criminal negligence, IMO.
As CEO of the biggest exchange, you don't just let hundreds of thousands of Bitcoins walk without noticing.
Why aren't more high level people saying this? This is insane!
they are saying it. they high level people (foundation) actually went to japan to look over his systems and investigate it. they cannot talk about it publicly because a police investigation is still ongoing. even though karpeles has appointed a trustee to be the skape-goat of the bankrupcy. allowing karpeles a "free-pass" in that respect, he can still be charged with negligence. we just have to wait and see what the investigation reveals... Well I sure hope he is charged and convicted of negligence, because if this ain't it, I don't know what is. Negligence is not a crime in this situation. Unless he stole the coins of facilitated the theft of the coins in some way he is unlikely to be convicted of anything. |
|
|
|
He'd have to have more than that!
Wasn't he the first person to own an ASIC miner?
I remember that thing was making $2,000 a day when Bitcoin was only $20 each
I think he exchanged most of what he mined for fiat to pay for bills, ect. |
|
|
|
I think you made a mistake in the title by putting the word 'Results' in there.
Nope! These are the results as relased so far by the government. I guess Monday we'll find out the prices. I read somewhere that the prices nor the names of the winners are not going to be made public by the government. If second market wins any of the blocks then we may get the price they paid to give some kind of idea of the winning bid prices |
|
|
|
Problem with 401K is that it's not inflation proof. Your Grandmother, presumably if she's old enough, likely remembers when she only paid $0.05 for a Coca Cola in a restaurant; whereas today, a Coca Cola costs up to $2 (if not $3 in a bar). Coca Cola increased 40 to 60 times within generational memory. The samething will happen to your 401K - it'll decrease in value by 20 to 60 times by the time you collect.
Pensions suffer the same issue too, I might add, unless you have an indexed pension like government workers. The reality is most of us will probably die from starvation in our old age due to not having any money, unless we manage to keep a job somehow.
That's the reality of inflation, folks. Back in the age of prosperity, when currencies did not inflate to the moon, it wasn't uncommon for people to retire in their 50s. It's a dystopian society if we are working people to death, especially when this is contrasted by all the Paris Hiltons and other capital owning parasites
The price of a soda varies very widely from restaurant to restaurant. The vast majority of restaurants also offer something called "free refills" today, while this was likely not the case when Coca Cola cost $0.05 (fountain drinks technology was not available at this time, and it was always sold in bottles), so when you pay "$2" at a restaurant you are really paying a total of $2 for as many Coca Colas as you drink while you are at the restaurant. The value of 401k's is based on the investments in the account. It is the goal of these investments to beat inflation. In 1914 the Dow Jones Industrial average (DJIA) was at ~71 (for rounding we can call it 100), as of yesterday the DJIA closed at 16851.84 (call it 16,000 for rounding). This is a return of 160x verses 60x for your soda example (from 5 cents to $3 at a bar). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
