Doesn't Bitcoin automatically adjust the medium of exchange by fairly fixing the bitcoin supply (limiting the quantity of the medium of exchange but making it infinitely divisible - very similar to gold divisible down to the molecular/atom level), and making it nearly infinitely divisable, and rewarding/punishing a holder during deflation/inflation when tradeable goods,service,other increases/decreases in relation to tradeable bitcoins?  Isn't a balanced Equation of Exchange achieved without addition/removal of bitcoins, due to the above?  Is gold a physical accounting record and bitcoin a digital accounting record?

Would there be a bitcoin without miners?  Same for bitcoin merchants/traders/exchangers. Without you, would there be a very, very sercure network having bitcoins in it - but would bitcoins have no value in relation to any goods/services/other neither?

Shouldn't a bandwidth requirement be brought in, other nodes can check each other's available bandwidth and reject a node if its cpu/gpu is out of ratio with its contributing bandwidth?  Is high cpu/gpu offline key solvers (just retrieving the puzzle and submit the solution if found) not a threat to future scalable efficient blockchain distribution?  What incentives are there for blockchain distribution?  Bandwidth is a great transfer cost contributor?  Is there a minimum number of nodes that should received the broadcasted solution from the winning node, based on network difficulty?

Without the introduction of any assumptions, the Equation of Exchange is a tautology ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tautology_%28logic%29 ) like it is stated in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equation_of_exchange . Equations always need to be fulfilled - that's why they are called equations!  On the left, (M=Total quantity of bitcoins in exchange) x (V=Total number of times the quantity of bitcoin in exchange is exchanged in a certain time period) should equal the right, (Q=Total quantity of goods/services/other exchanged for bitcoin in exchange in a certain time period) x (P = Value relationship between M and Q, giving rise to a rate of exchange, inflation/deflation in the rate of exchange)



Is it equitable to have a system where you reward some arbitrarily issuer during deflationary periods with more bitcoins, and inversely punish subsequently all bitcoin holders by debasing their existing holding during inflationary periods?  Will you be able to withdraw bitcoins during an inflationary period to keep your M constant in your system? Are you only going to ask the arbitrary issuing parties from the deflationary period to return their bitcoins when an inflationary period arrives, or are you going to give to some in a deflationary period and take from all in an inflationary period? When goods/services/other offered for exchange with bitcoins decreases (inflationary bitcoin system) - all the holders of bitcoins will have to bear the brunt of the decrease in the value relationship (rate of exchange = P = Value relationship between bitcoin and goods/services/other available for exchange with bitcoin).  The holder of bitcoin makes the decision whether he would offer more bitcoin available for exchange, thus influencing M (M = bitcoins available for exchange).  Thus holders of bitcoins should be rewarded/punished as more or less goods/services/other are offered for exchange with bitcoins available for exchange.  Bitcoin already adjusts the Equation of Exchange dynamically - and does not reward some arbitrary issuer under deflationary circumstances - and punish all bitcoin holders under inflationary circumstances.  Coin generators are incentivised by network difficulty changes in combination with their reward (for securing the network) based on P (value relationship of bitcoin to other) to increase/decrease their share of supply to the network difficulty - bringing balance in network difficulty based on the Equation of Exchange's balanced P.  Every coin generator has another profitable decision point on this, depending on his cost/profit/future expectation structure.  Your system is doomed for failure - as it will reward a non-holding issuer (imagine that in the sense of company shares, I'm a holder of shares but someone else dilutes my value by issuing more shares not to us holders - but to himself!!) during deflationary periods and punish existing holders during inflationary periods (imagine that in the sense of company shares, now that the shares are less valued - the other person who is issuing shares in deflationary periods are not un-issuing shares now that we have an inflationary period and all holders of shares now get devalued shares!!)  Deflation/Inflation is necessary as a measurement of how much bitcoin is valued.  If you feel uncomfortable with deflation/inflation (of bitcoin, shares, pigs, gold, etc.), don't be a holder of them - if you still want to use them in trade - trade for them and minimize your risk by minimizing your exposure risk period by exchanging on the fly.  Ultimately the holder of bitcoin is taking the risk, and should be rewarded or punished by uptake or flight of exchangeable goods/services/other from the bitcoin system.

If you do not want to invest in Bitcoin by being a Bitcoin holder and having the subsequently reward/risk on your investment (free market capitalism),

but still want to use it as a medium of exchange and reduce your exposure to its reward/risk (deflation/inflation) - there is a simple solution - exchange it immediately after you received it in exchange, back to your medium of choice (on the fly, programmatically if you prefer).

With regards to hoarding - as long as people have needs and only other people can fulfill in that need and they have some medium of exchange, wouldn't they use that medium of exchange to fulfill in that need?  Isn't nearly 5x more bitcoin exchanged than gold due to its ease of exchange?

With regards to early adopters - wouldn't people adopting now, again be viewed as early adopters in a year as well?  If you valued something when no one else did, didn't you satisfied the equation of exchange at your time of adoption?  Again aren't you exposed to possible reward/risk (deflation/inflation) from your point of adoption?

How would you define a Ponzi/pyramid scheme?

If counter trade for Bitcoins is Q = goods/services/other available for countertrade with Bitcoins,

and Number of Bitcoins in existence is M = number of Bitcoins in existence

and the velocity with which Bitcoins in existence M is traded for Q = V

and the benchmark level giving a ratio of all goods/services/other's system valuation in relation to Bitcoins = P (with increase/decrease in P giving the systems inflation/deflation)

then in accordance with the equation of exchange ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equation_of_exchange ), this equation needs to be satisfied in all instances:

M x V = P x Q

Thus, for inflation/deflation benchmark level P = M x V / Q,

and approximated to:

%Pchange = (%Mchange) + (%Vchange) - (%Qchange)

so if %Mchange is fairly constant or very close to zero (only 50btc generated every 10 minutes)  -> take as 0%
and assume %Vchange remains constant (liquidity remains unchanged) not to complicate matters in this relationship  -> take as 0%

what remains of the above equation of exchange in relation to %change is:

%Pchange = -(%Qchange)

The above is telling us that there are an inverse relationship between %Pchange and %Qchange
This means that if Q (goods/services/other offered for exchange with bitcoins) increases drastically, there is a resulting equally drastic decrease in P.

If %Pchange is a very large negative number (or in other words P is decreasing drastically, or in other words the benchmark level giving a ratio of all goods/services/other's system valuation in relation to Bitcoins is decreasing drastically) you have deflation of the system.

If %Pchange is a very large positive number (or in other words P is increasing drastically, or in other words the benchmark level giving a ratio of all goods/services/other's system valuation in relation to Bitcoins is rising drastically) you have inflation of the system.

So if you want to have inflation or stabilization of the benchmark level giving a ratio of all goods/services/other's system valuation in relation to Bitcoins, you will need to decrease or stop/stabilize any new goods/services/other available for exchange with Bitcoins.

That's the equation of exchange.

Have common sense reined supreme over misapplied academics?

Are all nodes propagating the blockchain across the network - or only generating nodes?

If only generating nodes propagate the blockchain, does all Coin generators' nodes have an equal pro-rata ratio between cpu/gpu hash rate and connected network bandwidth to actually propagate the blockchain among new / non-generating nodes?

Or can a Coin generator's network traffic be throttled to a very low level and still have a hash rate share in the network of own hash rate divided by full network's hash rate?

Block chain propagation seems to be slowing - as more nodes are coming online and the cpu distribution is not equitable among all nodes (due to gpu's in use) and the nodes online for block generation/transmission is diminishing in ratio to non-generating nodes coming on line due to this fact?

http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=1458.msg26046#msg26046

http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=10860.msg155532#msg155532

Isn't this problematic for scaling the bitcoin network?

As long as a merchant converts on the fly to his currency of supply - he is not exposed to the markets.



If bitcoin is a rapidly appreciating asset, can you not afford to lend your bitcoin for currency at negative rates in exchange for currency?  In other words, if you expect a 10% appreciation in bitcoin's value over the loan/exchange (to be exchanged back after a certain period) term against some currency, wouldn't it still be worth your while to lend it out at -5% bitcoin interest, and still get a real return expressed in the currency that you gauge the appreciation of bitcoin against?



Because bitcoin's supply is fairly fixed, it becomes a demand side balance act.  As long as demand is increasing or goods/services/other is offered for exchange with bitcoin, bitcoin will show greater value in the equation.  If demand is decreasing or goods/services/other available for exchange with bitcoin is decreasing, bitcoin will show a decrease in value in the equation.

Isn't every bitcoin bought a bitcoin sold?  (Except for the minute 50 btc / 10 minutes added to the system?)  Monthly turnover of bitcoin in existence is more than 5x that of gold in existence, and thats only at the major exchange - excluding trades for goods/services.  Can that be called hoarding or fluid exchange?  And maybe it is not popular in all the nations of the world - but some still prefer in having a surplus instead of a deficit and working towards a reserve (saving, hoarding or what else you would like to call that) instead of a shortage (bankruptcy, hunger, devastation, or what else you would like to call that).  Haven't some nations funded other nations inflation (/shortage) by foreign direct investment in the currency because some currencies were believed to be world currencies?  If that trend should reverse - wouldn't it mean devastation (even to a lesser degree for some of the former foreign direct investor countries as well)?

Because it is webbased https://www.mybitcoin.com/ would be platform independent for everyday use.  But it has its limitations.

Moved here http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=12098.0

Some other neutral (shouldn't all press be neutral?), negative and positive bitcoin mainstream coverage at http://news.search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A2KJ3CfWh.pNCUIAbYjQtDMD?fr2=sort&p=bitcoin&ei=UTF-8&fr=news-us-ss&sort=time

New Scientist : http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21028155.600-future-of-money-virtual-cash-gets-real.html
and http://stirling-westrup-tt.blogspot.com/2011/06/tt-ns-2815-future-of-money-series.html

Some other neutral (should all press be neutral?), negative and positive bitcoin mainstream coverage at http://news.search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A2KJ3CfWh.pNCUIAbYjQtDMD?fr2=sort&p=bitcoin&ei=UTF-8&fr=news-us-ss&sort=time

Some other neutral (should all press be neutral?), positive, & negative mainstream articles on bitcoin:

http://news.search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A2KJ3CfWh.pNCUIAbYjQtDMD?fr2=sort&p=bitcoin&ei=UTF-8&fr=news-us-ss&sort=time

Thank you!

How do I start bitcoin client to recalculate my wallet.dat balance - as the balance on the client are not what it is supposed to be, and does not correspond to my balance for my receiving address at blockexplorer.com ?  Only the last transfer to the receiving address has been included in the client's balance calculation and not a prior transfer to the same receiving address.  The blockexplorer.com shows the correct balance for the receiving address key.  I DO NOT want to redownload the whole blockchain.  What is the bitcoin.exe -? parameter for balance recalculation from the available blockchain data already downloaded?

Total Bitcoins sent last 24h is 600,727.92 BTC (Source www.bitcoinwatch.com), total traded for fiat currency on major exchange (MtGox) last 24h is 56,604.96 (Source bitcoincharts.com)

There is a breakdown of transactions, blocks created, and currency traded at  http://bitcoinmonitor.com/

For a list of goods/services that are listed as available for trade for bitcoins see https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Trade

If you have a good/service that you would like to add to the wiki list, you can create a wiki account and add it at https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Trade


If you would like to compare the ratios to the global decentralized forex market see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forex_trading
"...as of April 2010, average daily turnover in global foreign exchange markets is estimated at $3.98 trillion..."

as a ratio to

Global GDP see https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2195.html?countryName=&countryCode=&regionCode=%3E
"... World       GWP (gross world product): $62.27 trillion (2010 est.) " - that's for the year.

Don't only criminals and not bitcoiners in general need to fear non-repressive governments and the democratic law?  Are bitcoiners not on the right side of the law?  Is trading/exchanging cryptographic key pair data rights illegal?  Are there a lot of computer power going into generating these key pairs?  Does the effort in producing these unique key pairs make them valuable (for other cryptographic applications as well due to the key holder having access to the public key and privately holding a valuable key solution - do you need to brute force attack the right to 50 x 1e8 SHA keys for 10 minutes at 4.44 Thas/sec?  Will the effort to brute force break this SHA keys be cheaper than their value?  Are they worth their value?  Are they valuable in cryptographic value, to protect their own value?  Does the key holder have the ownership rights to the key pair as the key holder?  Can you legally transfer your unique digitally protected transferable software licenses if the license allows for that?

Typical joe/jane:  I can't wait for a facebook application that allows me to transfer to my friend with my blackberry with btc's to make up for my share of the bill at the restaurant.  The app writer, as well as the person who referred me to this convenient method to transfer btc's to my friend can take a small fee on the transaction - as well.  I'm not interested in running a client - because i don't even mine on my blackberry.  I just want to give to my friends sometimes, easily on facebook with no complicated addresses - just want to click on their facebook names please and add number of bitcoins!!!

Joe now likes Jane
Joe sent Jane 0.3 bitcoins
Jane poke Joe

Is gold just a physical accounting book - crediting the physical/LEGALLY entitled atom holder?
Is bitcoin just a digital accounting book - crediting the physical/LEGALLY entitled key holder?