What happend if mtgox.com website dissapears - who will know what is actual exchange rate for Bitcoins.
The "actual exchange rate" is whatever rate you exchange your bitcoins for. If the MtGox site disappears, you just have to exchange your bitcoins another way. |
|
|
|
To make things fair we now need urgently modify carrot genome so that carrots shrink over time after they were harvested. Satoshi already thought of that. As soon as you pick them, they start shrivelling up. You have to palm them off onto someone else before they become putrid and worthless. |
|
|
|
Fairness/reciprocity: if Bitcoin is seen as 'that online currency that made a bunch of early adopter geeks obscenely wealthy' then that's bad.
If Bitcoin is seen as "that online currency that lets you make payments without making PayPal obscenely wealthy", it can only be a good thing. |
|
|
|
|
Carrots are great because they are an inflationary currency and you can't hoard them. You are forced to trade them before they rot. For some reason this notion appeals to old-money people.
|
|
|
|
|
I think Stefan means that he prefers PayPal for now, because it is easier for him to buy stuff with his PayPal balance.
No problem, let him accumulate a Bitcoin balance until it gets big enough that it's worth his while to find ways to do useful stuff with his bitcoins.
|
|
|
|
|
People seem to be asking for a convention that meets these criteria:
1. It can be scaled downwards as far as needed
2. It is based on divisions of 1000 like the SI system
3. It uses the familiarity of 100 "subcoins" per "coin".
Here's how we can do it.
For now, we use Bitcoins as the "main" unit. For convenience and familiarity, we "usually" use two decimal places (e.g. 0.15 or 2.63) which gives us a resolution of one bitcent.
If bitcoins become significantly more valuable, we can start expressing prices in milli-bitcoins (nickname "mills") and milli-bitcents (nickname "millicents"). So 0.02 bitcoins would be 20.00 mills, and 0.15 mills would be 15 millicents.
If bitcoins become even more valuable, we start expressing prices in micro-bitcoins (nickname "mikes") and micro-bitcents (nickname "satoshis"). So 0.02 mills would be 20.00 mikes, and 0.15 mikes would be 15 satoshis.
This caters for everything down to the current base unit, but if ever a finer resolution is needed we just continue the pattern: nano-bitcoins, pico-bitcoins etc.
|
|
|
|
|
What to call holders of Bitcoin:
Less than 1 bitcoin: Boy
1 to 100 bitcoins: Mate
101 to 10,000 bitcoins: Sir
10,001 to 1,000,000: Kind Sir
1,000,000 or more: ArtForz
|
|
|
|
It'll be interesting if there is another strictly better distributed cryptocurrency anytime soon.
I've thought about that from time to time, and I cannot imagine any disadvantage of Bitcoin that can be improved without changing the essential nature of the currency. Sure there are some minor issues. For example, an average block time of 10 minutes might not be optimum, but these are relatively insignificant things won't make-or-break a currency. There are major issues too. For example, that it's difficult for non-technical users to secure their wallet. But all the major issues seem to be amenable to incremental improvement. It's just a matter of people putting in enough time and work to fix these things. When you add Bitcoin's "first mover" advantage to that, I think it's highly unlikely that another distributed cryptocurrency will overtake Bitcoin any time soon. Because Bitcoin's fundamentals are strong, a pledge of allegiance is irrelevant. And if Bitcoin's fundamentals were weak, a pledge of allegiance would be useless. So I respectfully decline Atlas's invitation to "put 95% of my life on it". |
|
|
|
|
I totally agree with xf2_org.
Plus, this has the advantage that functionality continues to improve, instead of everyone devoting their energies to arguing which kind of refactoring is the best, and the project ending up in refactoring paralysis.
|
|
|
|
|
What Luke-Jr means, is: "You do know that serial numbers would change whenever the block chain reorganizes, don't you?"
|
|
|
|
|
It's my experience that software re-organizations rarely deliver as much benefit as was anticipated. Sure, some things are cleaned up, but cruft inevitably increases elsewhere.
Having said that, I don't mind what refactoring is done provided every change is totally screened against the introduction of possible security holes.
No-one should mess lightly with security-critical code.
|
|
|
|
|
Sheesh, talk about trying to create a problem where there isn't one!
If you don't know the sender's receiving address, just refund the coins to
1HqTdoMWtxZdbRb3awQDHykCWCPrJjKFyz
|
|
|
|
|
Also notice how there's a small gap in the Faucet withdrawals whenever a block is generated. This probably tells us something about network propagation speed or somesuch.
|
|
|
|
So, please, help add to the list.
Infectious diseases. Diseases are a difficult class of externality, because the size of the effect is unknown to the infected person. If the person diagnosed with bird flu goes to the coffee shop, they may infect zero, one, or more people. Or, the diagnosis may be incorrect, and they may have something similar that's harmless or is ten times more deadly. |
|
|
|
|
There are much better ways for people to spend their time improving Bitcoin, instead of switching the forum software to obtain minor (if any) improvement.
Having said that, the one thing I love about vBulletin is the "Thanks" button on every post, as a simple way to allocate and track karma.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
