Show Posts
|
Pages: [1] 2 »
|
If its so bad why is the OP trying to build on top of it? I think you guys just have a bunch of negative energy here and nothing to contribute. People like Veggeta and Giraffe.BC are innovators, you just have hot air.
Thank you! It's nice to see someone who understands how hard it is to come up with something original, only to have critics try to tear it down.
|
|
|
You own a forum built specifically for trolls to come in and troll each other? LOL It's not a forum, it's a Twitter feed. No trolling, just tweets of TweetForum threads. I was talking about Giraffe boards, " The Pit The place to flame and fight with other posters, the staff, and anyone else who rubs you the wrong way. " "Promoting Ignorance since 2009" Lol, you clowns are not welcome here. Oh, that. Not a troll forum, just a small general discussion board. No one takes it too seriously, hence the tongue in cheek banners. That site has nothing to do with#TweetForumTweets, however. Please try to stay on topic and avoid the unnecessary personal attacks.
|
|
|
You own a forum built specifically for trolls to come in and troll each other? LOL It's not a forum, it's a Twitter feed. No trolling, just tweets of TweetForum threads.
|
|
|
As many of you know, Twitter is a popular new web 2.0 interface that allows people to read and post web 2.0 content from a variety of mobile devices, including phones and computers. "Twitter allows users the ability to update their profile by using their mobile phone either by text messaging or by apps released for certain smartphones / tablets.[46] In a 2009 Time essay, technology author Steven Johnson described the basic mechanics of Twitter as "remarkably simple:"[47] As a social network, Twitter revolves around the principle of followers. When you choose to follow another Twitter user, that user's tweets appear in reverse chronological order on your main Twitter page. If you follow 20 people, you'll see a mix of tweets scrolling down the page: breakfast-cereal updates, interesting new links, music recommendations, even musings on the future of education." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TwitterI have an idea for a twitter feed to create a web 2.0 style interface to one of Bitcoins' hottest new forums, TweetForum.com. The idea would be to automatically take topics from there and convert them to 140 character messages or "tweets" and automatically send them to followers of the feed. Every once in a while, we would also "tweet" a Bitcoin payment address for people who like our feed to give us donations to pay for expenses. I'm looking for developers to write the software to automatically take the forum topics and convert them into "tweets". Payment will be in the form of shares of any Bitcoin donations we receive from our followers.
|
|
|
I will definitely consider offering gas masks in case of volcanoes or other environmental disaster.
I think this could be a large untapped market, potentially. I asked about buying a gas mask at Home Depot and all they had were flimsy respirators for painting and stuff, which would obviously melt as soon as lava hit them. And nothing at all in the way of lava-proof suits. I did buy a big piece of rebar, though, which I hit people with who come into my yard. So I don't need a baton or anything like that.
|
|
|
Maybe if the universe revolved around Giraffe.BC I'd care what you think but since it doesn't..
And guess what the market disagrees with you and so do I. Have fun with your delusions!
Thanks! Maybe I'll go order a pizza and pay for it with a small business. Small businesses are money after all.
|
|
|
So....what's wrong with saying gold isn't money? Gold isn't money. People don't exchange it for goods and services, people buy it (with actual money) and hold onto it. Just like other assets, e.g. silver, oil, buildings, paintings, etc.
I know goldbugs love bashing the Fed, but this is just silly.
Have you been to Utah recently? Gold is money.. and has been for the last 6000 years of our history, and somehow you know better? What is money: ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.goldfreak.com%2Fimages%2Fexter%2520gold%2520pyramid.png&t=665&c=0mLX7pTs2898jQ) I love when I go out to eat and pay the bill with a small piece of real estate, maybe tip an extra square foot section of a flag lot in Modesto if the service was good. Or that time I went to the movies and paid the ticket guy with a couple of MUNI bonds. Yes, it's all money. Everything is money. Dogs, pogo sticks, that full feeling after you eat a whole pie: money. And the fact that Utah has a goldbug-pandering state legislature doesn't change anything. States have no rights to issue currency. The bill simply said the state would recognize federally-issued gold and silver coins as legal tender. Whoop-dee-fucking-do. Walk into any store in Utah and try to pay for something with that Genuine Buffalo Head Gold Coin you bought from the late night TV infomercial. Let us know how that works out for you.
|
|
|
So....what's wrong with saying gold isn't money? That's not the question. The question is why Mr. Bernanke wants it not to be money. That's not really a question either, but I digress. I heard he doesn't want candy to be money either! Why does he hate candy? What's his angle???
|
|
|
So....what's wrong with saying gold isn't money? Gold isn't money. People don't exchange it for goods and services, people buy it (with actual money) and hold onto it. Just like other assets, e.g. silver, oil, buildings, paintings, etc. I know goldbugs love bashing the Fed, but this is just silly.
|
|
|
The difference is that my "baseless" assertions actually match reality. You and your "OMG the USD is dooooomed!!!" brethren are just spreading FUD based on wishful thinking and a fundamental misunderstanding of basic economics. And probably more than a little greed, as I'm guessing many of you bought gold at absurdly high prices in anticipation of a collapse that's never coming.
Once again, no argument: "your wrong, just because." You just keep holding on to those $. LOL, you want me to somehow prove to you that the USD is not going to crash? Want me to prove that an asteroid won't hit Earth next Tuesday while I'm at it? The burden of proof rests with those making outrageous claims, not with those who are skeptical.
|
|
|
I don't think the kooks are a majority, they're just very vocal. The trolls are as big of a problem as the kooks are. Normal people are definitely interested in Bitcoin, we just have to shut the kooks and trolls up so that the normal folks will tend to stick around.
I see far more people calling everyone who doesn't agree 100% with either their politics or their rose-colored view of Bitcoin trolls than actual trolling. And even for actual trolling, if people responded with intelligent, logical arguments instead of kooky crazy-talk, it would be a very effective way to persuade casual lurkers than trying to ban all comments that aren't reflexive agreement with the majority view.
|
|
|
Greed is coloring many Bitcoin supporter's perceptions. They think "wow, if Bitcoin went up to $200 next week, I'd make a ton of money! So that's obviously a good thing!" They're forgetting that Bitcoin was originally intended to be a currency, not a get-rich-quick scheme.
Speculation is fine for commodities, because it helps the market determine the price. It's terrible for fledgling currencies. There's a reason that new currencies have traditionally been backed by something else (gold, other established currency, etc.): you want people comfortable that the value is based on something other than people's perceptions and you won't get screwed if you hold on to them in exchange for goods and services. Otherwise, why would anybody use the new currency? This problem is magnified tenfold for Bitcoin, since it's not backed by any institution and has a much higher barrier to entry for the casual user than little slips of paper with numbers and pictures of dead people on them.
I suspect Bitcoin will provide some useful lessons for the next cryptocurrency, but that's about it.
|
|
|
And who the f**k are u ordering mods around ? I've seen your previous post, are you us govt insider ?
We really need to stop this retarded bullshit. It seems like lately, everyone who posts anything from a contempt-ridden scathing criticism of Bitcoin to [slightly negative] industry-insider advice about a Bitcoin business, clear up to meta-comments about the relevancy of a given thread are being called US government drones. Shut the fuck up. Seriously. Comments like this make Bitcoiners look like a bunch of fucking kooks, and let me tell you that because of the nature of Bitcoin itself we need no fucking help in that department. You know what I think would be a good forum rule? No calling someone out as a government plant unless your avatar includes a self pic with a tinfoil hat on so we all know to ignore your inane bullshit. Stop trolling, troll!! Take your trolling trollery somewhere else! (In addition to ranting about the government stealing their thoughts, one of the rules of being a forum crazy is that anyone who says anything you don't want to hear is automatically trolling.)
|
|
|
You and your "OMG the USD is dooooomed!!!" brethren are just spreading FUD based on wishful thinking and a fundamental misunderstanding of basic economics. Then I suppose the meaning and implication of runaway debt is completely lost to you. US debt will not be paid off. It can't be paid off. NO AMOUNT of taxation, reasonable or otherwise, can put a dent in the US's ocean of debt. That means a DEFAULT, an overnight trashing of the dollar's value (20-30% inflation in less than a year, it happened to the UK in 1975), large increases in gas and food price, and widespread unemployment of perhaps 30%. Oh, and world reserve currency status? Say goodbye to it. That will be a killer blow to the USD. This is coming within a few years at the most, and there is nothing anyone can do about it, except get out of US dollar assets. Within a few years at most, huh? You remind me of that guy Camping, who recently predicted the end of the world. May 21 came and went, and strangely he didn't admit that he was completely wrong. I doubt you will either when, say twenty years from now or so, you look around and realize everything is still pretty much the same. No big collapse, no economic apocaplyse (except that gold is back down at $800 an ounce or so, so all the goldbugs lost a ton buying high and refusing to sell), just normal growth and inflation. Doomsday nuts always seem to forget all their confident assertions as soon as they're proven wrong. [/quote]
|
|
|
Hey, good argument! My turn...
The USD is finished; nobody wants to hold a hot potato. Controlled inflation is a bad thing, not a good thing.
I puzzles me how so many people can make baseless assertions, while being so derogatory and self righteous.
The difference is that my "baseless" assertions actually match reality. You and your "OMG the USD is dooooomed!!!" brethren are just spreading FUD based on wishful thinking and a fundamental misunderstanding of basic economics. And probably more than a little greed, as I'm guessing many of you bought gold at absurdly high prices in anticipation of a collapse that's never coming.
|
|
|
<snip] but the model of exponentially-increasing difficulty is just foolish. A model where participants earn a share of transaction fees based on the number of actual transactions they help process would be far less wasteful of electricity and CPU cycles and could potentially encourage far broader adoption of the Bitcoin software[snip>
It is feared that this scheme you propose would lead to an exponentially fast increase in the number of bitcoins, with a sudden stop at 21 million. The current scheme is much less violent. Only if you insist on having a 21 million upper limit. I contend this is a bad idea, and one of the weaknesses of the Bitcoin model.
|
|
|
Speculators make markets MORE stable, not less. Or perhaps I should rephrase that - they make markets more rational, because when a speculator sees a price he deems "irrational" he can take a financial position in the other direction and profit if he's correct. This incentive encourages people to critically asses the market in question. A market in which speculation was difficult would be a market I'd be less confident in. For commodities markets, sure. For a fledgling currency? Not so much. There's a reason that early on, currencies have always had to be backed by something tangible: it allows a consistent, stable value for the currency to exist right out of the gate, so people don't have to worry that they're going to be stuck with worthless paper if they accept it for their goods and services. It's like training wheels on a bike -- you really need extra stability at first to build confidence. Protip: name-calling is unnecessary. I'm not going to call you a "nutter-butter" just because you believe economies should be centrally-planned. If it helps, I meant nutter-butter in the nicest possible way. ![Cheesy](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/cheesy.gif) People have this impression that the dollar has been around for hundreds of years and has proven its trustworthiness. They do not realize that it has only been a mere 35 years since it was disconnected from gold. The USD, in its current form, is only 35 years old, and given the fact that the US Gov is in debt far beyond what it can repay without printing the money (especially if interest rates rise), and that other nations are growing increasingly skeptical about its place as the world reserve currency, you will see the dollar in a long-term decline over the coming two decades. This decline could turn into a collapse very quickly as the vast sums held in reserves are sold by nations who increasingly prefer to trade without US dollars. What other currency is the rest of the world going to switch over to? Euros? Yuan? Yen? The USD is still far and away the safest place for other nations' currency reserves. I agree that our national debt is getting too large and we need to reduce our deficit to avoid getting ourselves into hot water down the road, but it's hardly the impending apocalypse you're trying to portray it as. As for your 35 year argument, you're trying to create a more uncertain image for the USD than is realistic. It's not like there was some fundamental shift in the 70's where people were marching down to the bank to get their gold every week and suddenly couldn't because of this massive paradigm shift. The government simply realized that keeping large reserves of gold was unnecessary -- the training wheels could be taken off and the bike would keep rolling along just fine. Which it has, and will continue to do. Better, in fact, because now without the training wheels you can do maneuvers you couldn't do (like avoid a full blown economic depression).
|
|
|
Whatever floats your boats. Just sold it, thanks for the offers =P.
Hope you were at least able to cover your GoDaddy registration fee.
|
|
|
1) There is nothing wrong with speculators (so long as they aren't defrauding anyone) - they are merely individuals who try to predict future value, by putting their own money on the line. An efficient market is made by their actions, as they bring pricing signals forward in time. It's as important in Bitcoin as it is in the oil markets. But people HATE speculators! ![Roll Eyes](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif) I have no problem with speculators, but they will kill / have already killed Bitcoin as a currency. Obviously, if there's money to be made, people are going to try to make it, so the trick is to set up the system so that speculation can't make it so unstable as to be unattractive to new adopters. I have no idea how to do this, but whoever designs the next cryptocurrency had better be thinking about it. 2) The dollar IS just paper, man. It's an important philosophical, economic, and moral issue. Expressing antagonism toward a monetary system which is inflated at whim at the expense of those who are coerced into holding it is a very reasonable position to take, IMO. Oh dear, I suspect you might be one of the nutter-butters I was referring to. Here, write this down: The USD isn't going anywhere. It's not 1895, you don't need to trade your greenbacks for shiny metal anymore. Controlled inflation is a good thing, not a bad thing. It's puzzling to me that so many people involved with a cutting-edge electronic currency project are so economically primitive. 3) Regarding mining, exponentially increasing difficulty is anything but foolish. You forget that one of the primary reasons for the number crunching (which you call wasteful) is to make it difficult for any computer or network of computers to manipulate the protocol. The longer Bitcoin operates, the more secure the blockchain becomes due to this dynamic. Not foolish. It's completely foolish. The actual horsepower needed to validate transactions is a tiny fraction of the horsepower currently being used to mine new blocks. As for manipulation, the peer to peer transaction network would be far more secure if it were composed of a vast number of individuals with modest computing resources vs. a relatively small pool of dedicated mining clusters. The choice of an exponential algorithm was arbitrary and is a huge barrier to scalability, since it requires massive hyperdeflation to scale up. Which is a terrible expansion model for an electronic currency you expect anyone to voluntarily use. At the core of your skepticism is, I think, a disapproval toward anyone who is able to obtain wealth without "hard work." Some miners will indeed make a killing from their early discovery of Bitcoin, and that doesn't sit well with you. You think it's "unfair." The irony, of course, is that in the same breath you defend fiat paper currencies which have for centuries enabled the politically connected to obtain incredible wealth through the process of inflation. Yet, it is not wealthy bankers profiting from the printing presses for whom you seem to have disdain - but rather a small group of tech-enthusiasts who first discovered what may become a revolutionary technology, and risked their own time and capital to invest in it. I couldn't care less about who made how much money on Bitcoins, I'm just giving my perspective as a casual miner who is dubious of the long-term viability of this project based on the underlying mechanics and current market conditions. It wouldn't bother me to be proven wrong.
|
|
|
|