---------------- UPDATE Jan 13, 2013: The SatoshiDice apps for desktop and android have been updated to v1.1 and are now in open beta. They will now be available from SatoshiDice.com for the first time (they'll be going up this week). This new version (v1.1) can be downloaded here: SatoshiDICE Android App MD5: ff89d643b9b2c8ab2c539dbcd6e2c73d SHA1: 5fa09730ed612c48817f84c79758857f62441fc7 (Installation instructions for Android: Download file, then enable Settings -> Security -> Unknown Sources. Then install a file browser (folks recommend Astro), find the .apk you downloaded and run it. Android should install directly from the file on the device.) SatoshiDICE PC/Linux/Mac Desktop App MD5: bfa7f5ec58a3bc45dd6b8904b356cd2b SHA1: 9c1c76aef3dd825151f40b89d30acde7df4fc0b9 ---------------- They've arrived! After much development, SatoshiDICE now has two apps for your gambling enjoyment!  NOTE: THESE ARE IN OPEN BETA. THEY HAVE BEEN TESTED, BUT USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. If you find any bugs, please report them. Both apps are "thin clients" meaning they are real Bitcoin wallets. When you open them up, you'll see a deposit address created for you. You can deposit and withdraw Bitcoins to that address whenever you wish. A thin version of the blockchain is downloaded on first launch (about 20 MB). Before coins can be bet, they must have received at least one confirmation. The apps transact and receive to SatoshiDice.com just like any other wallet.  Features- Point and click interface to select bets
- Specify bet amount easily and repeat bets easily
- Stack bets to process in one transaction, saving on tx fees
- See your performance broken down by each bet option
- Apps work as wallets and you can backup your wallet files
- With the Android version, play on the go!
- Use these apps to demonstrate the awesome power of Bitcoin for the gambling industry...
IMPORTANT: The wallet files created by these apps are not encrypted, so keep them safe. In a future release, encryption will be supported. If you're worried about the integrity of the files, please use the checksums provided above. Android Tablet Version:  Linux, Windows, Mac Version:  |
|
|
|
|
How can it overcome that garbage?
By getting bigger. Haters gonna hate.
|
|
|
|
But here's my point. Isn't savings a good thing?
Yes, it's a very good thing. Anyone who calls it "hoarding" doesn't understand this, though. |
|
|
|
Have there been any precedents of bitcoin related topics being #1 on HN at some point?
Can somebody remember:
- When?
- What topic?
- What results pricewise, Google trends-wise? It has happened once or twice before. I don't remember for what. |
|
|
|
And before you say, "but tolls are so obnoxious!" you should know that, once again, private industry solves that problem via either pre-paid subscription models or RFID drive through tolls. In Dubai, the "toll booths" are just small structures that cross over the freeway. They scan a sticker in your car window when you drive underneath at 80 miles per hour. Easy.
Yes, tollbooths are shitty only when they're statist, because there's no incentive to make them not stupid and not slow. When you have voluntary customers, the last thing you want is to ruin their trip with delais. Bingo |
|
|
|
|
Great responses here, thanks you guys!
|
|
|
|
One thing is wrong with your analogy, your keep comparing the income in the amount of other "Currencies". Bitcoins has yet to be recognized as a currency by the government, so it is a commodity, not legal tender. So it would be more correct and better to compare it to lets say casino tokens. If you have $10,000 in casino tokens do you report that winnings to IRS, of course not, but as soon as that is converted to a recognized currency, then you report the winnings. That is how Bitcoins is treated and the only way it can be treated. Lets say I have BTC1000 obviously you can report bitcoins as bitcoins, so another area is the value is always changing so lets say one year I file on those BTC1000 and the mt gox price is $10 so I keep the bitcoins as bitcoins and pay taxes on $10,000. But next year those same coins are only worth $5, can i report I took a lost $5,000. Obvious answer is no but it should be yes cause it is commodity and having it's value determined by outside forces, of the market.
Good points gweedo and perhaps a real accountant is needed to clarify this. You're correct that until Bitcoin is recognized as a "Currency" (let's use the capital "C" version of the word) it is more like poker chips or pounds of rice or bars of gold. Any accountants here? If I'm given $100,000 worth of gold or oil or rice, do I report that or wait until it's been sold for a currency? (In truth, of course, Bitcoin is a commodity-money or commodity-currency, just as gold or silver coinage. This is what Bitcoin properly is by nature, but how the law observes and treats it may be different.) |
|
|
|
Generally speaking I completely agree with the conclusion of your response, but there is one point you make which is just flat out wrong: "The origin of money is barter. In fact, money derives directly and unavoidably from barter." Nowhere in recorded history has money ever derived from barter. It has always derived from credit or the need for mobilization of armies. http://www.amazon.com/Debt-First-5-000-Years/dp/1933633867<cough> No sorry. Money is the most liquid good in a barter economy, and arises naturally. And it does so, so quickly that there is no recorded example of a stable barter economy; at least not in the sense that some form of commodity didn't function as the monetary "change" in a barter transaction. There are plenty of examples of societies that evolved money well before any need to raise or mobilize an army, even before the invention of writing in order to record same. Don't argue with me, argue with David Graeber and history. Heheheh the fact that you cite a book which reviews the past 5,000 years betrays a misunderstanding of money, which is much older than that. We are not talking about round metal coins here. "Money" was deerskins and seashells long before coins existed, and long before any of the more advanced financial instruments examined by Graeber. It's you who is arguing with history. It does not take a rocket scientist to realize that 50,000 years ago cavemen were exchanging one good for another (barter). You agree, right? During this barter, a smart caveman would realize that if he traded not just for things he personally wanted, but things which others might want, then he could get more for his efforts. The first time a caveman realized this, and traded his meat for the fur which he knew another valued, money was discovered. As other cavemen realize that it's always easy to trade a fur to someone else, they begin using furs as a medium of exchange. This is money. The world did not fundamentally change when these first cavemen started behaving this way, there was no point in history when mankind shifted from "barter" to "money." It's a progressive, natural process of marginally favoring certain goods over others which leads to one or several goods tending to become used as money. Money is thus inseparable from barter. Stated differently, we're all still bartering every day, and the item we prefer to barter for is now called Federal Reserve Notes, at least here in the US. A widespread fantasy which is talk in every economics 101 book, but a fantasy nonetheless. Economies have not historically been built to facilitate value exchange, but for other reasons, incomprehensible to economists. The problem arises because we have taken our economics and worked backwards - whereas what was needed was a comprehensive look at what actually took place (and is taking place today in primitive tribes around the world) in order to understand how money was created. Ummmm I can assure you that almost none of my opinions are obtained from an Econ 101 textbook. I'm merely thinking inductively. If I were a caveman (which we know existed), and I had possession of some object (which we know occurred), I would sometimes trade it for other objects. Noticing other cavemen doing similar activities, I'd adjust my trades so as to acquire goods which could be traded easily to others. Unless you can prove that my hypothesis there is wrong, then money was indeed formed naturally from barter. I'm not using a book to figure this out, I'm just using my brain. |
|
|
|
ASICS will have no long-term, significant effect on the price of Bitcoins. ASICS DO have a long-term, significant effect on the difficulty of mining. Mining difficulty will skyrocket, making GPU mining non-profitable. But, the supply of Bitcoins is unchanged by these dynamics and thus no price effect (other than perhaps short-term confused traders who don't understand this  ). |
|
|
|
Generally speaking I completely agree with the conclusion of your response, but there is one point you make which is just flat out wrong: "The origin of money is barter. In fact, money derives directly and unavoidably from barter." Nowhere in recorded history has money ever derived from barter. It has always derived from credit or the need for mobilization of armies. http://www.amazon.com/Debt-First-5-000-Years/dp/1933633867<cough> No sorry. Money is the most liquid good in a barter economy, and arises naturally. And it does so, so quickly that there is no recorded example of a stable barter economy; at least not in the sense that some form of commodity didn't function as the monetary "change" in a barter transaction. There are plenty of examples of societies that evolved money well before any need to raise or mobilize an army, even before the invention of writing in order to record same. Don't argue with me, argue with David Graeber and history. Heheheh the fact that you cite a book which reviews the past 5,000 years betrays a misunderstanding of money, which is much older than that. We are not talking about round metal coins here. "Money" was deerskins and seashells long before coins existed, and long before any of the more advanced financial instruments examined by Graeber. It's you who is arguing with history. It does not take a rocket scientist to realize that 50,000 years ago cavemen were exchanging one good for another (barter). You agree, right? During this barter, a smart caveman would realize that if he traded not just for things he personally wanted, but things which others might want, then he could get more for his efforts. The first time a caveman realized this, and traded his meat for the fur which he knew another valued, money was discovered. As other cavemen realize that it's always easy to trade a fur to someone else, they begin using furs as a medium of exchange. This is money. The world did not fundamentally change when these first cavemen started behaving this way, there was no point in history when mankind shifted from "barter" to "money." It's a progressive, natural process of marginally favoring certain goods over others which leads to one or several goods tending to become used as money. Money is thus inseparable from barter. Stated differently, we're all still bartering every day, and the item we prefer to barter for is now called Federal Reserve Notes, at least here in the US. |
|
|
|
And after all that, Dmytri is still correct. If you think bitcoin is going to replace govt currencies then you are so far out to left field you dont need to reply. This place is just like Apple forums. Fanboys. You do raise some good points though.
Typically an assertion like that is followed by an argument. WHY do you think Bitcoin can't replace government currencies? If you arent taxed how do you think all those highways and roads and thousands of other things are paid for? There is no centralization we see scams all the time and there is nothing you can do about it. Your computer gets hacked you are done. Dotn care how many backs up you have it takes a matter of seconds to empty your wallet once its broken in to and you will not be reimbursed by anyone. I can go on and on. Mostly the arguments why bitcoin is superior are just lousy points aka quick transaction times and low fees, yawn. Ryann, listen carefully and I'll explain how things are paid for without taxation. It works like this: you take your money, and pay for the things you use. Simple. When you fly, you pay an airline and airport company. When you drive, you pay for a car. When you eat, you buy food. When you want internet service, you pay an ISP. In the case of roads, the fact that they are -currently- paid for via taxation doesn't mean that without taxation they cannot be paid for. Indeed, the early days of roads in America, they were all privately run. Heard the term "turnpike?" That used to refer to private highways that were paid via tolls. And before you say, "but tolls are so obnoxious!" you should know that, once again, private industry solves that problem via either pre-paid subscription models or RFID drive through tolls. In Dubai, the "toll booths" are just small structures that cross over the freeway. They scan a sticker in your car window when you drive underneath at 80 miles per hour. Easy. Roads are not hard to build, and it's easy to charge those who use the road for their usage. Far more complex services exist in the private marketplace... indeed the computer on which you're typing is far more complex than a road, and was "paid for" privately by private individuals. Should government pay for and manage all our computers? And don't get me started on "if there is no centralization we see scams all the time"... It is the centralized State which is the largest scam of all. |
|
|
|
|
I believe Jon (Coinabul) is speaking with the merchants to get some good figures on performance and I'm sure he'll be posting in the forum within a couple days.
|
|
|
|
it matters because the blocksize is based on consent. in theory, a miner could, if the network allowed it, mine a 1tb block including billions of free transactions. it doesnt allow it because bitcoin would be dead at that very moment. so right now the maximum blocksize is 1mb and that 1mb determines the maximum amount of transactions and in turn the minimum transaction fee to get into a block. that 1mb limit will likely be lifted at some point and be replaced with a different one. but there will always be a limit. it is necessary to have a limit that is reasonably low enough so the blockchain can still be transmitted and stored and high enough to allow for cheap transactions. in my opinion, "cheap" will be way more expensive than it is now. the cost of bitcoin is not linear and people tend to massively underestimate nonlinear developments.
i will not try and put numbers to it. to do that you would need to know the architecture of future full and thin clients, and the distribution of those among bitcoin users. but you have to understand the situation right now is not representative at all. we are looking at chess on a 4x4 board here, with four pieces and no pawns on each side, laughing about the simplicity of the game.
Hard drive space has never, and will never, be a limiting factor for humanity. A terrabyte is $100 right now... I mean come on. And indeed, nobody needs to use the full blockchain to use Bitcoin, so it's a moot point anyway. |
|
|
|
Best discussion on Bitcoin and money in forever - this is getting to the heart not of whether Bitcoin is good or bad, but of how we value the boundary between private and public goods in the next, networked century. I applaud Dmytri for bringing up the issue, and for highlighting the challenges that both Bitcoin *and* the state face.
My own opinion is that the Bitcoin crowd has a long way to go, and that Dmytri is "right". To be on the fence about it, I want Bitcoin to succeed in order to improve the effectiveness of both individuals *and* common action. Both can do better, and indeed *have* to if we're going to face up to an ever-changing, fucked up world.
Right now, Bitcoin is still "at risk" IMHO. It has promise. But it's also naive. It is an experiment that could go either way. But the challenge is not to rebel against existing hierarchies, nor to replace them.
The challenge is to re-build them. Better.
Rebuild reputation models. Rebuild tax models. Rebuild payment models. Rebuild banks and insurance models. Rebuild user interfaces. Rebuild local currencies.
Redefine "fiat".
Some excellent points. I constantly find myself at loggerheads with Libertarians and Anarcho-Capitalists on this forum who seem to have some kind of utopian vision but usually no strategy whatsoever to achieve their aims. "Step 1, destroy existing society. Step 2, deliriously hope that it magically rebuilds all by itself in the direction that I want" is not a viable strategy. The key is to build, not destroy. Everyone should just relax because old things eventually crumble on their own accord. Utopian vision? I have nothing of the sort. Bitcoin doesn't make the world perfect, and a libertarian world in which freedom is respected would not be a perfect world either. And there is a very good strategy to achieve "our aims" (though you've already made a mistake in thinking all libertarians have the same aims). My strategy is this: build Bitcoin. I'm not destroying anything, I'm building. I'm building an alternative to the decrepit system we now use. And nobody is hoping that anything "magically rebuilds." Rather, some of us understand that it is man's natural tendency to build, and that the extent to which coercive elements of society are removed is the extent to which man can best build and create. It's not magic, it's nature. What IS wishful thinking is the Statists who, for some reason, think that a group of men can plan the economic relationships of millions of people. What IS wishful thinking is the Statists who believe the unending printing of money can actually create real wealth. The libertarians are not the ones destroying anything. They are not the ones bombing, building machines of war and destruction, and crushing the spirits of millions of otherwise creative people with regulations and fallacious dogma. Those who are involved in Bitcoin are trying to build something crucially important. There is very much a strategy to it, and no magic is involved. Markets work because of the natural tendencies of humans, and we're demonstrating this every day we continue forward. |
|
|
|
SR is offline apparently because of huge traffic levels. Anyone who would sell btc on this news is pretty silly |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
