 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
The new information is in the distribution parameters that were updated based on the Mt.Gox data.
The Mt.Gox leak was the data after accounts were frozen right? Considering there were many hints of Mt.Gox's impending failure well in advance (goxing was a verb a long time ago), I expect a large percentage of people withdrew their funds either completely or mostly (my case). Therefore, I am not sure how useful raw Mt.Gox numbers would be for finding the overall distribution. |
|
|
|
Fiat is suitable for criminals. Why isn't it on the news already??  Because it's old news. |
|
|
|
As far as I understand, bitcoin doesn't eliminate the ability to use debt.
What I don't understand is why bitcoin is inherently deflationary. Wouldn't it depends on the economy / GDP? If the economy is growing, bitcoin acts in a deflationary manner, but if the economy shrinks, bitcoin will be inflationary. Right?
Is there an assumption that the economy will always grow, or always be desired to grow? More of a philosophical question, but is a continuously growing economy feasible (or desirable) in the long run on a planet with finite resources?
The global economy is growing due to population growth plus productivity growth plus inflation. The bitcoin economy is growing as more users join the bitcoin monetary system, at roughly 30% per month. Both growth rates far outstrip bitcoin's issue rate. Therefore, bitcoin is deflationary even before hitting max caps. I agree, but what about in the long term, that is when (if) bitcoin reaches global acceptance? Then, no more users are joining and inflation is presumably not controlled by a central agency. (Also in a longer term, there will be a point when the population is no longer growing either due to lack of space or resources or naturally, for whatever reason, as is occurring today in Japan and many European countries.) |
|
|
|
|
As far as I understand, bitcoin doesn't eliminate the ability to use debt.
What I don't understand is why bitcoin is inherently deflationary. Wouldn't it depends on the economy / GDP? If the economy is growing, bitcoin acts in a deflationary manner, but if the economy shrinks, bitcoin will be inflationary. Right?
Is there an assumption that the economy will always grow, or always be desired to grow? More of a philosophical question, but is a continuously growing economy feasible (or desirable) in the long run on a planet with finite resources?
|
|
|
|
If difficulty rise 10x, that might happen, otherwise no
Is there a thread somewhere discussing the relationship between hashrate and BTC price?
This is exactly what I have been telling people - BTC is the transport, not the end result, although it does have some basic value in it as a store.
What people are also not seeing is that it isn't people buying 1 BTC for $10K, they will be buying 0.1 BTC for $1000 - knowing that its still worth $1000 for the internet sale they are arranging later that day. Its long term value will be irrelevant to people when it becomes mainstream!
This is why I don't see it having a long term value - much like Domain names were going for $100k+ during the dotcom days and today, people are smarter in how they buy their online company names.
This is the first argument that I have heard that has tempered my price expectations. It makes sense to me, but upon further thought, the backbone of the transport system are the miners. For the transport system to be healthy, miners need to make a profit via block rewards and transaction fees. Related to my question above, I therefore wonder if anyone has modeled BTC value versus hashrate (probably need subtract electricity and other costs from a BTC price). Another factor that could affect the value of the transport system is the range of value amounts (dollars, yen, or whatever) that people / institutions want to transfer. In other words, the system needs to be large enough in terms of market cap in order to absorb these amounts without causing large volatility. ("velocity" of money?) Enough maturation to achieve this situation wont happen by Q1 2014 of course, but long term, this must make the value of a BTC very higher. I also wonder how this and the miner effect could influence each other. Cheers. |
|
|
|
|
Hang in there Doog. You will be rewarded in the long run.
|
|
|
|
Well, I guess the white paper is pretty vague on the limits.
So we'll see what the actual limits are in a couple of hours.
When I discovered this coin last night, I had hoped it would be finding all prime numbers so that eventually bitcoin could be attacked using the prime numbers found by this coin.
Which would be poetic, imho.
As I understand having a complete list of huge primes would compromise a lot of systems, not just bitcoin itself. Would you mind giving a brief summary of why that is so? In this case, Primecoin isn't a passive alternative to Bitcoin but a hostile competitor? |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is not difficult to use if all you want to do is send and receive bitcoins. My goodness, how hard is it to
a) install the client (gasp),
Concerning (a) from a newb perspective, google searches led me to try first installing the bitcoin-qt client, which yea, was a big turn off for me. I bought some BTC on gox then sent it to my bqt wallet address and was a bit shocked to not be able to see it for many days while the blockchain was being updated - 'where is my money??'. Also, the client sucked up all my cpu leaving me wondering what the heck was happening - software shouldn't be designed to 'go crazy' and burn up my laptop while hiding my money, so something must be wrong (I know why this happening now) - I imaging non-technical new users especially may have discouraging thoughts like this. This is the first link to a 'bitcoin' search: http://bitcoin.org/ - the entrance to the rabbit hole for me. The 'choose-your-wallet' page, IMO, understates the time and resource issue. I recommend the bitcoin foundation to be a bit more explicit about these drawbacks and put a link to lightweight columns first in the list of wallets, stating clearly to start here if you are non-technical or want the 'quick start' option, instead of hiding this information in a popup that is accessed by hovering over an icon at the bottom of the page. It is a simple thing, but I think it will help to carry curious people further down the rabbit hole. jd |
|
|
|
|
Cool. Will be appreciated.
|
|
|
|
It is verifying the blocks it download, of course it use the cpu. Is it a problem that your computer is actually used? Because that is why computers exist: to be used.
So it is normal. Thanks for the information. The problem is that I want to use my computer to do other things in the meantime, which at times can be affected by overall CPU usage of course. Anyway, I tried Multibit and like its convenience. Will check out Electrum. Thanks. |
|
|
|
I just posted a very related message, so will repost here: > > hello i installed bitcoin-qt (0.8.2) for mac osx (mba), and whenever i run it, it takes up all the cpu. is this normal or happening to anyone else? maybe i am missing a setting somewhere? as a side note, i found a nice free command line tool to throttle processes http://www.willnolan.com/cputhrottle/cputhrottle.html that seems to work well. cheers. jd |
|
|
|
|
+1 on this being a great idea and implementation
Just to make sure i understand correctly, in the 'stats' tab, in the long run, the "site is up" value should approach the value for "wagered" times the house take of 1%?
Right now that would be about 30,256BTC * .01 -> 302.56BTC.
Also, is there a way now (or a way planned) to track the history of the values in the 'stats' tab in an automated way?
Thanks for the site.
jd
|
|
|
|
hello i installed bitcoin-qt (0.8.2) for mac osx (mba), and whenever i run it, it takes up all the cpu. is this normal or happening to anyone else? maybe i am missing a setting somewhere? as a side note, i found a nice free command line tool to throttle processes http://www.willnolan.com/cputhrottle/cputhrottle.html that seems to work well. cheers. jd |
|
|
|
|
