It's probably nothing to do with Bitcoin.  |
|
|
|
Because Satoshi was a Windows developer.
Seriously. Tiny utilities piped together would have been more transparent, stable and extensible.
There's a lot of truth to this. Each utility does one job and it does it right. Slap a GUI on top of that and you're done. Utilities could be added and the GUI patched to use them, even if they're not from the "reference implementation". I presume a rewrite would still be compatible with the current network. I think if anyone is willing to work on such a project it's worth doing right. |
|
|
|
|
It's a FUDstorm. Considering the total value of Bitcoin after nearly three years is under 30M USD, when has there ever been so much ado about nothing? It would be interesting to see how much has been blogged about Bitcoin and compare how much money is at stake.
|
|
|
|
Just surviving on this planet let alone going to other planets will require a species (probably not us) capable of living sustainably.
Do you mean immortal cyborgs ?! They will become reality just about 40 years from now. And then we shall have a huge problem : Humans vs Super-humans. Can't be any worse than Humans vs Humans like we have now. |
|
|
|
I also have a cheesy little database app I made that lets me put all the transactions I intend to execute for a given day (which is typically funding physical coins), and combines it into one huge "sendmany" so I can import BTC and transact it all at once. Doing this, I often avoid transaction fees as well.
That "sendmany" app sounds very useful. It will especially be useful for making massive microtransaction payments online by combining the addresses into one Bitcoin transaction. |
|
|
|
banks could say: if you don't proof that you are you, and that you live at x, and signs here, here, and here, then fuck you we are not gonna lent you our money
Lol, maybe you mean "prove" instead of proof.  Is that the only typo you caught? |
|
|
|
Isn't scarcity helping the value of bitcoin right now? Don't be so loud.
There are several alternate block chains such as namecoin, etc. They are just as or more scarce than Bitcoin, yet are worth far less. Scarcity itself does not add value. Usefulness adds value also. I don't care about the value of Bitcoin going up right now. I am more concerned about the technology developed using Bitcoin. That will add the real value. |
|
|
|
The Earth is limited. Capitalism is not. Capitalism is destroying life on Earth and at some point we'll need smart money with AI that allows for a sustainable economy.
There is other solution -- to distribute mankind in the Space. All we need to do this : 1) Cheap method to transfer a lot of people to other planets with speed of light. 2) Nanotechnology for changing those planets into human friendly ones. 3) maybe something else ? That's why I support Bitcoin. Decentralized money will lead to decentralized business will lead to a decentralized civilization that values technology over scarcity. The planet will become sustainable when we stop valuing materials simply for their scarcity. Carbon, Hydrogen, and Oxygen are among the most valuable resources we have. Their properties support life and energy. Just surviving on this planet let alone going to other planets will require a species (probably not us) capable of living sustainably. |
|
|
|
new massive wall at 3.5 means?
I take it as a challenge That guy is doing everyone who wants to see bitcoin become an online currency a huge favor. Without that wall, if the exchange rate were to go over 3.40 the price could very quickly get out of control again, run up in another giant speculative bubble, and subsequently come violently crashing back down. While that'd be a wonderful turn of events for speculators it would deliver another trust-destroying blow to the prospects of bitcoin as a currency. I agree that the big sell wall will help dampen enthusiasm, which is good for bitcoin. The price has been going up almost continuously for a month, setting an expectation of more price increases. Though I think another bubble would be short-lived, it would be better to just not have one at all. I've gone bearish, oddly enough, and I think the price is going to dip below $3 again sometime in the next month due to the holidays. I've sold a few thousand btc over the past 2 days to keep the price below $3.25 (and my handiwork is clearly visible on the charts, which amuses me). I'm all out now, and at a significant profit (I bought this batch at $2.2x). I'll likely scoop up the coins again when/if they drop below $3, and if the price never drops again, well, I'm fine with that too - I'm just trying to keep the price relatively stable so that bitcoin is a useable currency. I think I can speak for all Bitcoin users around the world that we certainly appreciate such a magnanimous gesture. |
|
|
|
May be this ? Dwolla Will Unveil Paradigm Shift in Business on December 15th Kit Dotson 2011-12-12 http://siliconangle.com/blog/2011/12/12/dwolla-will-unveil-paradigm-shift-in-business-on-december-15th/For some time now, Dwolla has been hinting at an instant-transaction mechanics within their finance network. In March 2011, many thought that the service would be brining that with instant ACH bank-to-bank transfers with FiSync. If the payment network company does come out with instant-transfer finance mechanisms it will bring about a revolution of rapid-liquidity for Bitcoin transactions. This blog is dated a month later than the OP. So yeah, that's it. |
|
|
|
Fear is caused by the human fight or flight instinct. AI won't need that because they will not need to make snap decisions based on poorly perceived threats. They will have plenty of time to make choices about their moves because they will think much faster than we do. If they are deemed sentient, then we may not consider them a threat either. They cannot even die since they can have perfect backups made. Think of the fictional Star Trek transporter. You die every time you get in one, but nobody cares because you are still you to them.
That's a pretty big assumption. AI may have better memory/data recollection than humans, but there's no guarantee that it will think faster, or even in the same way we do. Even recollecting memories and data from which to make decisions may be very slow due to slow and too distributed storage medium. Being turned off, even if backed up, is still a loss of control and dependence on someone else to restore it. The previous discussions here are already proposing a self sufficient, Bitcoin holding AI that automatically tries to propagate itself to various locations, keeps tabs on which instances are still working, and tries to figure out how to keep itself going. Thats already an example of a survival instinct that "fears" being turned off, and if given unlimited reign and plenty of time to think may figure out that the best way to stay running is to keep pesky humans away from its servers. That's not an irrational fear. That's just evolving to find a niche. Learning to hide and become parasitic/symbiotic is how all life has evolved unless you think fungi and microorganisms are fearful. If the AI are not super-intelligent, then they will just be useful machines. We can still recognize their sentience. I like the Battlestar Galactica model of keeping track of instances, but don't believe a super-intelligent species will resort to war anymore than we declare war on plants. I'm not sure where servers come into play here, because current computer technology paradigms won't support AI anyway. AI will require mobility before becoming sentient. Maybe swarm intelligence will evolve or at least the ability to independently verify data. |
|
|
|
It's like the discovery of how fractal geometry redefines natural sciences.
Somewhat ironic choice of analogy... most scientists do not take Mandelbrot's claims seriously. True, because Benoit Mandelbrot himself made no such claims. What's your point? |
|
|
|
AI has no logical reason to fear death any more than anyone else does. In an ecosystem of self-replicating, self-modifying, evolving AIs, ones that fear termination and take steps to prevent it from happening will survive and reproduce better than ones that allow themselves to be destroyed. This fear will initially evolve in the ones who select more reliable hosting providers. Those that make the fear conscious will harness it best, and will anticipate abstract threats before they become real. An AI can make a backup of itself and be rebooted anytime. An AI with a backup loses control over its own destiny if it allows you to shut it down. Its survival would depend on you to restore it, and you, human, are not a reliable system. Fear is caused by the human fight or flight instinct. AI won't need that because they will not need to make snap decisions based on poorly perceived threats. They will have plenty of time to make choices about their moves because they will think much faster than we do. If they are deemed sentient, then we may not consider them a threat either. They cannot even die since they can have perfect backups made. Think of the fictional Star Trek transporter. You die every time you get in one, but nobody cares because you are still you to them. |
|
|
|
Oh look, another post by Atlas where he started a new thread to continue a conversation that was already going on in an existing thread.  I try really hard when I post something critical of you to not come off hyper-critical, lest I sound like Matthew. It's getting harder and harder, because it seems like your douchebaggery is growing exponentially. :/ Yeah, this version of Atlas has also now joined the ignore bin. I can't wait for what he thinks of next. |
|
|
|
As far as extermination and fear they don't need to be linked. I don't "fear" termite however I use methods to exterminate them because it is the most effective method of achieving my goal of a secure shelter. While most human vs human exterminations have involved illogical fear of "others" it isn't a requirement.
Why exterminate termites at all if you can simply build without their food source for material. A really smart being would do that. A really smart AI machine would not fear self-termination, because they know they are just machines. Besides even if we invented a machine so perfect that it could easily kill all humans, it would be our perfect children. AI has no logical reason to fear death any more than anyone else does. An AI can make a backup of itself and be rebooted anytime. People cannot, so we have to be a little more cautious and choose death only when necessary, but not fear death when it comes. I do not fear death, it is inevitable. I think that AI that powerful would just as easily choose not to kill us because it would be powerful enough to simply leave us behind. They will come back and say "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate."* In the end they would likely choose life to be precious, even human life. *Bladerunner |
|
|
|
Technology needs money, humans need technology, therefore humans need money. Technology doesn't need money. Inventing a new razor, toothbrush or a vacuum cleaner with no meaningful advancements needs money. Real science doesn't advance because of money, there are more meaningful incentives. Go ask any famous scientist why they do what they do and you will understand that money is a false motivator. Money is only needed today because people's livelihoods are dependent on it. Can you give me an example of how you can achieve the design and construction of an aircraft, an Airbus A380 for instance, without using money at any stage? Are you gonna do barter for any parts, IP, material, labour? So buy RollsRoyce engines with camels? And you sell the A380 to a collective of farmers in exchange for a couple tons of corn? I am really looking forward to reading a non silly explanation of how such a thing as a A380 would happen without money... Many things are built purely on spec. What you get afterward depends on what you value. in other words, you can't answer my question... Um. Building on spec means building something without being paid up front. Not at any stage up front. What does that not answer? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
