Bitcoin Forum
May 28, 2024, 12:48:23 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 »
1  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: How to deal with DDOF attacks on bitcoin. on: August 31, 2010, 03:26:31 PM
I think that payment methods on the markets should be negotiated by the buyer and seller directly.

You have every freedom required start an exchange where that is the case, but it won't be the exchange that offers the lowest spreads.  A successful exchange will keep the overhead low for the customer.

Quote

Payment providers vary a lot between countries, continents, and even languages. Having the market railroad everyone into using the payment methods they prefer is wrong. I mean, how exactly is that a free market?


It's a free market because anyone can start an exchange.  These are not centrally controlled businesses.  Exchanges that serve their customers the best will get the greatest reward (that's called "profit" for the entrepreneurally challenged).
2  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: How to deal with DDOF attacks on bitcoin. on: August 30, 2010, 08:32:36 PM
The companies that will let you trade gold<->dollars at the lowest spreads do not accept credit cards.  It's either wait for a personal check to clear, or pay by wire transfer.  I do not believe that a bitcoin exchange is going to find the world any different.  The only way they can offer low spreads is to avoid credit cards and paypal altogether.
3  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / RedHat 4 build? on: August 24, 2010, 06:17:38 PM
Has anyone modified the makefile and/or source files so it builds with RedHat 4 and gcc 4.1.2?  It sure would be nice to keep this system a RedHat box and not kluge it up.

Thank you.
4  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: market effect of a catastrophic design flaw on: August 24, 2010, 05:29:30 PM
You've hit on the need for a bitcoin futures market. Been thinking of coding one of those up myself. It is a much more profitable way to speculate in the currency. We can talk about why it has exceptional potential for the bitcoin community.

That's exactly correct.  People are far more likely to buy and use bitcions if there are markets that make it clear what a bitcoin is worth to others.
5  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: market effect of a catastrophic design flaw on: August 24, 2010, 04:07:29 AM
On the contrary, I can't seem to find any intrinsic value for bitcoins whatsoever.  Is this correct?  Historically all monies have started first as some commodity/good with at least some intrinsic value.  Are bitcoins, however, the very first money with purely extrinsic initial value?

Using your example of "intrinsic value", what sort of intrinsic value do you feel gold bullion has?  I've never seen a gold coin do anything other than sit in a safe.
6  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Local exchange and stabilization on: August 24, 2010, 04:05:19 AM
The demand by others for bitcoins.  That is exactly why gold is over $1200/ounce.  Bitcoins are very similar to gold.  If you understand why people pay so much for a yellow metal that sits in a safe and does nothing, then you will have your answer.
Excellent! Charles Ponzi himself decided to come to the forum. Welcome!

How exactly is gold like bitcoins?
What makes bitcoins more like gold than say like 2008 Oklahoma collectable quarters?

Are you calling gold a Ponzi scheme?  This is getting rediculous.
7  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Local exchange and stabilization on: August 24, 2010, 03:31:45 AM
As a medium of exchange, yes.  As a storage of value, well, that's debatable.
Hear hear!

There appear to be some people who think that bitcoins represent a store of value ABSENT the acceptance of bitcoin as a commonly accepted medium of exchange. Nothing could be more preposterous. What value would it be storing?

The demand by others for bitcoins.  That is exactly why gold is over $1200/ounce.  Bitcoins are very similar to gold.  If you understand why people pay so much for a yellow metal that sits in a safe and does nothing, then you will have your answer.
8  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Perhaps a DoS flaw? on: August 24, 2010, 01:32:10 AM
the time delay that will cause for the transactions to show up in the blockchain would limit your abilities. 

If you send .0000001 bitcoins with each transaction, then starting with a balance of 1000.0 bitcoins would allow you to do quite a few transactions while you are waiting on the others to mature.

So is there simply nothing currently in place to stop a bit-flood?
9  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Perhaps a DoS flaw? on: August 24, 2010, 12:48:17 AM
Erm I just accidentally sent Bitcoins to myself. It currently has 18 confirmations and the client actually says 'Payment to yourself'.

Couldnt someone make blocks very very large by doing it repeatedly?
It would take a few seconds to make a endless bash loop doing it.

Why can you send coins to yourself?

You could create the same problem with two clients and a script running on each.  The real question that concerns me is:  What happens if someone creates software to create trillions of transactions?  If older transactions are not removed from the transaction chain, then it appears there is a denial of service flaw.
10  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: market effect of a catastrophic design flaw on: August 24, 2010, 12:42:50 AM

The risk of a vastly superior design would be unlikely to collapse bitcoin, because stakeholders still likely consider their bitcoins to have value -- and that's the fundamental underpinnings of any currency including bitcoin, shared idea of value.
I'm not sure I agree with this, unless you mean that the stakeholders will likely still consider their bitcoins to have value temporarily.  However, if it is well known, even amongst stakeholders, that a superior currency exists they will gradually migrate towards it (even if they tell each other otherwise).  

There are many things vastly superior to gold, but it continues to go up in value.  When people are looking for a safe place to store their wealth they are not analyzing technical merits.  They instead look at the historical value, which is exactly why we are having this conversation right now.  Bitcoin is new and people are concerned about its future value since it has no history.
11  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Local exchange and stabilization on: August 24, 2010, 12:32:33 AM
If retailers never accept Bitcoin, then it is a failure and whatever those other people do is irrelevent.

Most retailers are not accepting gold when you purchase something.  Does this mean gold is a failure and that the gold coins and bars you have are worthless?
12  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: market effect of a catastrophic design flaw on: August 24, 2010, 12:28:21 AM
I apologize if this has been brought up before.  If it has, please feel free to merely direct me to the applicable thread.  As an investor, one of the hurdles I am having a hard time getting over is the following:  What happens to the market for bitcoins when/if a vastly superior design is found? What is the probability of an unquestionably superior design being found?

There are things vastly superior to gold bullion or even ebay, but the two are still going stronger than ever.  The thing that will make bitcoin valuable is not a superior design but how widely it is accepted as a currency or commodity.

13  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: How to deal with DDOF attacks on bitcoin. on: August 23, 2010, 05:33:12 PM
It's not that freedom is entirely without risk it is that it is far better at getting results than the system we have now.

Well said!  Freedom comes with responsibility.  Freedom produces a lot, but you have to spend a little on your own well being.

14  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Local exchange and stabilization on: August 23, 2010, 05:30:25 PM
I feel like the commodity vs currency argument is somewhat cyclical.  Many finance professional would consider the USD as a commodity for analysis purposes.  On the other hand, I tend to think that an ideal situation is where local physical transactions utilize whatever commonly accepted local currency (whether it be USD, bitcoins, or some other community currency) and if I can have my debit card and bank exchange in and out on the fly.  When people ask me why my purchasing power always seems to be going up, I can tell them about the commodity aspect (scarcity) of bitcoin.  When they ask me how I'm able to purchase whatever, wherever I want, I can give them the currency exchange aspect.  That would be my utopia Wink

I'm not making a philosophical argument.  It's a practical one.  If tens of thousands of retailers are accepting bitcoins at their website, then the government is going to step in.  There is plenty of history to support this.  On the other hand, if tens of thousands of people are buying and holding bitcoins like they are beanie babies or gold coins, then you aren't likely to attract the attention of congress, yet you've met the goal of creating an alternate method for holding some of your wealth.

If the point of bitcoin is to make a stand against government invasion of our personal wealth, then bitcoin is on the right track.  When/if retailers accept bitcoins you can bet the government will be there to regulate and tax them.
15  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Local exchange and stabilization on: August 22, 2010, 10:15:38 PM

How, exactly, do you ensure compliance with tax laws when people are spending US paper dollars (cash)?

(rhetorical question...)

Call it rhetorical if you like, but that does not make your point.  The IRS has the ability to audit your bank accounts.  That makes it really hard to cheat on your taxes in any significant way.  Your bitcoin wallet is easily hidden, however.

And no, the IRS is not ok with Linden dollars and the rest.  Congress is already nervous about transactions that use anything other than the US fiat currency.

http://themonetaryfuture.blogspot.com/2010/01/irs-may-push-for-tax-compliance-in.html

Your link does not substantiate your argument that "IRS is not ok with Linden dollars and the rest".

It should surprise no one that the IRS wants to tax income generated by US citizens.
It should surprise no one that it is likely illegal to not report bitcoin income to the IRS.

And none of this changes bitcoin's viability in any way.  The IRS just wants you to report income, regardless of currency, or even if there is no currency involved at all.

[edited to add barter link]

You guys are fooling yourselves if you think bitcoin can be successful as a currency instead of a commodity.  If you treat it as a commodity I think it'll survive.  If you try and talk retailers into accepting bitcoins then you are just digging your own grave.

Have you forgotten the raid on the Ron Paul silver dollars?  Their mistake wasn't the silver dollars.  It was the move of retailers in the north-east to accept them instead of the US fiat currency.

http://www.thestreet.com/story/10390631/raid-on-ron-paul-dollar-maker.html

Again, your link does not substantiate your arguments.  That guy was a nutter trying to sue the US mint.

OpenCoin has a nice legal report on the currency that's worth reading.


Between 1933 and 1971 it was illegal to own gold bullion in this country.  And merchants weren't even accepting gold as a currency.  It is important that you understand why the US, for decades, required that you turn over your gold bullion to the US government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102

In Australia it is currently a crime to trade gold bullion without reporting all transactions to the Australian government.

You are living in blissful ignorance if you think the US government is going to allow widespread use of bitcoins as a currency.  However, it is perfectly legal to create something that people will buy.  Your odds are much better if you treat bitcoins as a commodity.

Then again, maybe the whole point in the bitcoin project is to ultimately be shutdown by government.  It would bring a lot of attention to government's control of our personal wealth.  If that is the case, then use bitcoins as a currency instead of something you hold for price appreciation.


16  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Local exchange and stabilization on: August 22, 2010, 08:04:35 PM

How, exactly, do you ensure compliance with tax laws when people are spending US paper dollars (cash)?

(rhetorical question...)

Call it rhetorical if you like, but that does not make your point.  The IRS has the ability to audit your bank accounts.  That makes it really hard to cheat on your taxes in any significant way.  Your bitcoin wallet is easily hidden, however.

And no, the IRS is not ok with Linden dollars and the rest.  Congress is already nervous about transactions that use anything other than the US fiat currency.

http://themonetaryfuture.blogspot.com/2010/01/irs-may-push-for-tax-compliance-in.html

You guys are fooling yourselves if you think bitcoin can be successful as a currency instead of a commodity.  If you treat it as a commodity I think it'll survive.  If you try and talk retailers into accepting bitcoins then you are just digging your own grave.

Have you forgotten the raid on the Ron Paul silver dollars?  Their mistake wasn't the silver dollars.  It was the move of retailers in the north-east to accept them instead of the US fiat currency.

http://www.thestreet.com/story/10390631/raid-on-ron-paul-dollar-maker.html


17  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Local exchange and stabilization on: August 22, 2010, 07:37:03 PM

Digital accounting and limited edition digital commodities are trivial and uninteresting by comparison.


An anonymous digital commodity is clearly not trivial.  Gold is very trivial however.  And you should hold a little physical gold for security.  Something tells me you prefer a fiat currency instead.  Smiley

Do you honestly think the US government is going to allow a significant number of retailers to accept bitcoins?  How, exactly, do you ensure compliance with tax laws when people are spending bitcoins?  You don't.  And the IRS isn't going to be understanding about that.
18  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: How to deal with DDOF attacks on bitcoin. on: August 22, 2010, 03:59:27 PM
@willsway

http://www.badcustomer.com/  this site lets you report customers who are a chargeback risk. Smiley

I tried to use this service in my own business with little success.  It's impossible to get someone to call you back.
19  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Local exchange and stabilization on: August 22, 2010, 03:55:53 PM
I saw a good definition of success when researching LETS. Int holds for bitcoin as well.

Money is hard to earn and easy to spend.
Bitcoins are easy to earn but hard to spend.

You can judge the success of bitcoin by how easy it is to spend your bitcoins on something that improves your life.

What's the point of owning 100,000 BTC if you can't buy the occasional, wine, woman or song?


You will have a hard time spending your gold bullion.  I wouldn't make the mistake of then assuming you don't want any gold bullion.

This is an important point that people are missing.  The success of bitcoin will depend heavily on how easily you can convert between bitcoins and the US dollar.  The number of retailers that accept bitcoins is not nearly as important.  We need 3 or 4 competing exchanges.  Once you have that, market forces will do the rest.
20  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Local exchange and stabilization on: August 22, 2010, 01:57:54 AM
(2) The deflation can't be too big, or it will discourage later adopters who will think they're being scammed by a pyramid scheme.   Also, according to some economists (hotly disputed by others) too much deflation can cause hoarding meaning fewer transactions being made in the currency.   Is it true?  Hopefully we'll get to find out.

You're confusing two different concepts.  bitcoins are more similar to a commodity than a currency.  When you think bitcoins think gold.  Or the stock price of a publicly traded company.  Holding onto these assets with the expectation that their value will appreciate is not bad for an economy.  In fact, you aren't going to change any economy with bitcoins.

If the price of bitcoins is rising then that means bitcoins are successful.  People are holding them for their value.  That's what you want.  It's not good or bad.  If people worry it's a "pyramid scheme", then it's no different than people worrying about a bubble in the price of gold.  People worry in all markets.  If you didn't have worry then you would not have price discovery.

Don't forget that every time someone buys a bitcoin there is also a seller.  So when someone bets that the value will increase, there is someone else betting the value will decrease.

In other words, it's all good.  Smiley  I'd measure the success of bitcoins by the number of people that claim to hold them.
Pages: [1] 2 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!