 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
This guy must be the biggest boss nerd out there, with a top youtube video his entire room is lined with his 40,000 piece k'nex ball machine. The only space left is to open his door. The more of these individuals we have accepting bitcoin for donations, the more people will copy. Do your part and hound people all over the internet to "TAKE MY MONEY!" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q76r-3z4Ckk&feature=b-mv |
|
|
|
I was reading the Bitcoin subreddit ( http://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoin) and came across this post, when I had an intriguing thought... http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/zwtc7/been_pondering_this/What if a wealthy man or woman, a titan of the new bitcoin industry, aging and at the end of their life decided to provably and publicly destroy their entire bitcoin fortune? The value of all bitcoin would rise as there are less of them, thus evenly transferring the wealth. The effect would be to evenly donate the value of their estate to every holder of bitcoin. This idea may appeal to the rugged individualists. The better they serve the public, the greater their fortune. The greatest act of charity is defined as the largest fortune destroyed, finally a way to evenly give to the entire world. They give back all of what they have earned and leave this mortal world. Does Bitcoin enable the ultimate form of equitable, transparent, and verifiable charity? Post-thought: I also offer this post as a retort to those who think that infinite inflation is a necessary thing. You are not thinking from a principled position. The elegance of this bitcoin solution allows technologies and ideas that are out of the scope of modern patterns of thought, inflation was never intended to be a feature from a design perspective. It is a way to get Bitcoin off the ground through proper incentivization. Infinite inflation would also distort the long term incentives between miners and fees. When the reward for solving a block pays nothing except fees collected, the Bitcoin ecosystem will balance perfectly because the ecological framework is in place and the social actors will be free to interact (assuming no outside coercive force disrupts this process). |
|
|
|
|
No one is selling bitcoin on MtGox, price explosion imminent or glitch? Is there a shortage of bitcoin?
Edit/Update: It was just a bug, nothing to see here, business as usual.
|
|
|
|
Over a week ago I purchased some btc from a reputable source, a week ago they sent the coins but the balance never showed up in my wallet. I confirmed that my wallet owns the receiving address and I tried rescanning the blockchain. I have not made any other transactions before or after this btc order, and I have a copy of the wallet before and after I made the receiving address in question. Below is the link to my address on blockexplorer, notice the funds have not yet been received. It makes me think I have to manually do something in order to claim them. Thanks in advance for shedding light on my issues. http://blockexplorer.com/address/1P4Zun4EmU6nhSqiXzbASX1cQxCuWJih35 |
|
|
|
|
It seems to me that after a few months now of solid volume and huge bidwalls, the price has become very stable. The longer the price stays at this level, the more distributed bitcoins become.
Is this a perfect real world example of a free market, one economists could study?
Will Bitcoin enjoy a steady price rise upward over long periods of time, or will another bubble form quickly and sell off, or will they fall steadily until the rampant inflation recedes?
With a growing number of people dollar-cost averaging their way into bitcoins, we will see if demand meets inflation.
This free, open, rampant speculation is what builds the stability of the currency. Enjoy Bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuQIMfMVMYgThis guy tries to justify the rigging by claiming he wants all voices to be heard...In an open democratic process he thinks rigging votes is the only way to get a fair outcome. Yes Atlas I constantly think I'm living in 1984, because my reality confirms it.
|
|
|
|
|
Would some enlightened individuals please explain how having more hashing power than 51% will affect an attack?
Will the speed with which they can rewrite blocks increase?
Will having 50.001% effectively be the same as having 60%?
Could a 45% attack work if the attacker gets lucky by finding the correct hash before the other 55%?
|
|
|
|
|
Let me tell you of my near folly experience. I withdrew BTC from an account online, that means I clicked address book (like I'm used to doing (I just updated to the new horrible UI)) then I saw a list of addresses so assigned a label to one and copied it and used that for my receiving address. What I did was rename the label of an address I already sent to, then copied that address thinking it was a receiving address. When I withdrew my BTC it was sent to this mystery address.
Fortunately the address I sent BTC to was another online account which I could withdraw from to a proper receiving address.
Moral of this Story: The "Address Book" button should be used for personal information relating to send functions, not receive functions.
Suggestion: Remove the "Address Book" button from the UI and put that functionality within the "Send Coins" button. For example, once a user presses "send coins" a list of the users addresses would show below the essential input boxes. This prevents users from mistaking an address book for a list of their own addresses.
|
|
|
|
|
Seeing as this is my new favorite forum, would some of you kind people refer me to some good resources so that I might find a good (the best?) smartphone? Or make recommendations? Thanks! <3
|
|
|
|
|
I would like to meet in or near Dallas to barter for bitcoins. I can offer silver (or send me pm). I'll make sure to keep this post updated. Thanks all.
Update: Still seeking as of 6/18/2011.
|
|
|
|
|
In an effort to better understand bitcoins, I thought I would give my take on what a bitcoin is and why it has value. You can then tell me if and why I am wrong.
First, bitcoins are a commodity designed to have the features we want in a money. Without transactions and human interaction, it is worthless. Without the monetary functions bitcoin has, it is worthless. The function of bitcoins is what drives demand, and it is supply and demand which determine price. It is the function of this new currency where it derives it's real value. To argue that bitcoins have no value because they aren't backed by anything is like trying to argue that gold has no value because it is not backed by anything. One hundred years ago gold is what was used to back the currency, it was the commodity underlying the paper. Bitcoins is the digital commodity which will back a future currency.
Second, the theoretical max of 21 million bitcoins is arbitrary because bitcoins are infinitely divisible and it is a commodity. You could just as easily have a theoretical limit of 1 bitcoin with an initial disbursement of 0.00000238 BTC and nothing would change at all.
Those are two rough ideas which I haven't found much validation with. Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
