|
S3052, do you post your updates on Facebook? I'd like to follow you there if I could. I hardly ever use Twitter...
|
|
|
|
i think for the bitcoin community as a whole, not having darkpools would make the system alot fairer to the average joe user.
This presupposes the 'average joe user' is short-term speculating, and that speculating is a zero-sum game to which everyone is entitled to all the facts. Individuals should be making buying and selling decisions based on their own circumstances and where they think the value of bitcoin is going. If someone is playing the very dangerous game of day-to-day speculation, then they should be sophisticated enough to live with the fact of dark pools. Note that dark pool users also have no idea what other dark pool users are doing. The idea that everybody is entitled to know what everybody else is doing is somewhat akin to those forum members who seemingly want to punish early adopters because they had the 'unfair advantage' of finding out about bitcoin before everybody else. Your own happiness shouldn't depend on other people being unhappy. Your own buying/selling decision shouldn't depend on everyone else's buying/selling decision. |
|
|
|
|
Let us know when they protest for less government spending and less government intrusion. That will be news.
|
|
|
|
I've always thought this kind of analysis is bullshit, but the fact remains, this guy has never been wrong. Props to you, Sir.
Yes, S3052 has done a really good job applying Elliott Wave theory to bitcoin. What I find extra amazing is that EW theory seems to apply in this market despite the fact the composition and number of participants is changing dramatically and quickly. The overall investing behaviour of new participants seems to match old participants. I would have thought they would have been bullish immediately upon finding out about bitcoin, but apparently their willingness to buy waxes and wanes with everybody else. |
|
|
|
Actually there is a sweet irony there, but you probably missed that.
Do you mean the part where you called anti-government types 'hypocrites'? Do elucidate. |
|
|
|
Me? I'm just along for the ride, mining away and taking as much of these Libertarians' money as I possibly can. They've already paid for my 14 new rigs, and are doing a fine job of paying for the remodel of my house. Bitcoins could go to $.25 and be made illegal in every industrialized country of the world and I would still come out way ahead.
Gee, that sounds an awful lot like... ...fuck the other guy I got mine.
|
|
|
|
These arguments remind me of people that complain about how much money sports stars make. Nobody is forcing anyone to buy sports tickets and merchandise and that is what is paying those athletes salaries. Likewise, no one is forcing you or anyone else to use bitcoins. Ultimately, it comes down to competition. If you think the early adopters might become too rich, start a new currency that works how you want it to work and convince people of its merits and that they should start using it. You'll need to do a lot of work to convince people that it's better than anything else out there and that they should put their money into it, but such is the nature of free market competition.
I agree with you 100% Steve. The problem is that the people making the argument on the other side often don't believe in free market competition, but they quite often believe in forcible imposition of what they think is a 'better', 'more fair' or 'more just' position which is derived neither from a higher power or some other externality but really from their own mind. So appealling to the free market is futile because they don't recognize it as having any type of authority. I, too, agree 100% with Steve's post. (By the way, I stopped following pro sports around 1990.) If you are referring to me (the OP) as one who prefers "forcible imposition" over free market competition, I suggest you read more carefully. Nothing could be further from the truth. If my squawks come across as complaints or whines, go away! In fact, I am expressing demand for a new product in the hope of gauging such demand among the broader market and finding people capable of assisting in such product's creation. If you can suggest a better (less intrusive, cheaper, or more effective) way for me to find interested parties, I will gladly listen. I am referring to that type of person who thinks the government should step in and "do something" about "obscene athlete wages". You sound like you want to start a competitive league with lower ticket prices. I commend you and wish you well. I'll probably stick with watching the pros, though. |
|
|
|
|
This is a terrific idea for another bitcoin exchange. While it eliminates the anonymity, it could serve as a good basis of trust between traders.
|
|
|
|
These arguments remind me of people that complain about how much money sports stars make. Nobody is forcing anyone to buy sports tickets and merchandise and that is what is paying those athletes salaries. Likewise, no one is forcing you or anyone else to use bitcoins. Ultimately, it comes down to competition. If you think the early adopters might become too rich, start a new currency that works how you want it to work and convince people of its merits and that they should start using it. You'll need to do a lot of work to convince people that it's better than anything else out there and that they should put their money into it, but such is the nature of free market competition.
I agree with you 100% Steve. The problem is that the people making the argument on the other side often don't believe in free market competition, but they quite often believe in forcible imposition of what they think is a 'better', 'more fair' or 'more just' position which is derived neither from a higher power or some other externality but really from their own mind. So appealling to the free market is futile because they don't recognize it as having any type of authority. |
|
|
|
Would you use facebook connect to register for a website which gives you free bitcoins?
Or would you prefer the website have it's own registration process?
I probably wouldn't use FB connect myself, but it is a good idea. Speedy, easy registration, and makes bitcoin more friendly for the uninitiated. |
|
|
|
|
What I'd like to know, casascius, is where you get the authority to determine what is fair?
And where do you get the authority to determine what is valuable work and what is parasitism?
And what makes you think you know the exact rate at which old btc should be converted to your BCP?
Anyway, why should later adopters be rewarded either? Maybe some central authority should simply distribute all btc equally over the planet.
You say you've done well outside of bitcoin, presumably in your software business. You haven't indicated that you feel you've been over-compensated in that realm, but how do you know you haven't? Just because you've provided a 'valuable service'? But maybe that 'valuable service' could have been obtained more cheaply from somewhere else or someone else. Have you therefore stolen some portion of what you have, even though it was given to you voluntarily?
You feel bitcoin approximates a pyramid scheme. But at the end of the bitcoin pyramid scheme everyone will still have their bitcoin. The problem is you have greater faith in the USD than in BTC. You think that a few years down the road the USD will be worth more in BTC terms than it is now, and that it will be that way by design. I'm afraid that most people here believe that BTC>USD in a few years, and if it isn't, it won't be because Satoshi designed it that way.
The real danger here isn't that some early adopters will profit (in USD terms). The danger here is that even after a 70 year experiment with the Soviet Union, even after a 40 year side-by-side comparison between East Germany and West Germany, even after the fantastic demonstration of the power of the free market in China over the last 2 decades we still have people who think they know better than everybody else. People who feel they can plan things for the rest of us so it turns out more 'fair', 'equitable', sunshine & rainbows. That type of thinking, given free reign, always ends in utter disaster and usually a great many deaths. That type of thinking is the very antithesis of the bitcoin project.
You may have good intentions, but there is a reason that is the pavement on the road to hell.
|
|
|
|
Suppose in 2008, in the middle of the credit crunch and bailout talk, an anonymous crypto expert had publicly offered to cure several of the world's monetary problems with a new currency much like Bitcoin.
Suppose, however, that he/she/they had made this offer contingent on a promise to pay US$10 million in tax money if the plan were to succeed. Leaving aside the unlikelihood of TPTB allowing such a measure to come to a vote, would you have voted for the tax? As for me, perhaps yes, $10 million seems about right, given the time and effort needed, plus a risk premium of a few hundred percent.
Now suppose the offer had been for $100 BILLION (1011) rather than $10 million. I don't know about you, but I would draw the line well below that figure. The example is not analogous to rewards earned through voluntary transactions. Taxation involves coercing those who disagree with a particular proposal into accepting it and contributing funds towards the project. In the case of bitcoin, or any other project/venture where participation is non-mandatory, those that invest see a benefit for themselves in doing so. I maintain the analogy is relevant. In the example, I did not ask whether you would pay the tax but whether you would have voted for it. We are now voting on how much to reward Bitcoin pioneers by valuing BTC. Apart from that, I agree with your comment. If Bitcoin and the 2009 chain "offer the best return" for something, rational people will use it for that thing. If something else offers better return, we will switch. Oh, well if your point was to ask if we would have voted for such a fix, I would say I would not have voted for the $100 billion solution nor would I have voted for the $10 million solution. That is a completely different matter from what I surmised was the point of your question, which seemed to be that the fixer didn't deserve $100 billion simply because it's a really big number. You analogy really isn't that relevant because we are not voting on how much to reward Bitcoin pioneers by valuing BTC. By valuing BTC today, we are voting on the expected future value of bitcoin. I don't think anybody is paying $9 for 1 btc today because they want to reward the pioneers. Do you? |
|
|
|
Suppose in 2008, in the middle of the credit crunch and bailout talk, an anonymous crypto expert had publicly offered to cure several of the world's monetary problems with a new currency much like Bitcoin.
Suppose, however, that he/she/they had made this offer contingent on a promise to pay US$10 million in tax money if the plan were to succeed. Leaving aside the unlikelihood of TPTB allowing such a measure to come to a vote, would you have voted for the tax? As for me, perhaps yes, $10 million seems about right, given the time and effort needed, plus a risk premium of a few hundred percent.
Now suppose the offer had been for $100 BILLION (1011) rather than $10 million. I don't know about you, but I would draw the line well below that figure.
This is a perfect example of why central planning by 'experts' doesn't work better than the market. $100 Billion to fix the meltdown of 2008 would have been a screaming bargain which any number of countries would have been wise to take up. The U.S. sunk a hundred billion into AIG alone. And you would have turned down such an offer? Why? |
|
|
|
|
I just finalized a Liberty Reserve to PayPal transaction and it went very smoothly. He kept in close email contact at each step of the way. Very professional. Thanks for good service.
|
|
|
|
|
1. What skills do you have that you could sell for BTC? Programming? Graphic artist skills?
2. I'm running a rig, and have also been speculating at MTGox. I wish I had taken the money I have sunk into a rig and just bought btc outright. I would be ahead by nearly a factor of 10.
|
|
|
|
Your english is awful this leads me to believe your a SCAMMER
Were you being intentionally ironic, Charlie?  Too bad there isn't an emoticon for **BURN!** |
|
|
|
|
Yeah, there needs to be a Canadian-based exchange permitting interac email transfers. Preferably within a TFSA account!
|
|
|
|
Just my opinion of course, but I would like to hear what you think "GovCoin" or "Facebook Credits" might offer *people who love freedom* and untouchable value (not just the masses) that will convince them to move, *and* why you think Bitcoin will fail if not eventually adopted by the majority in favour of something else (as if there can only be one successful digital currency network).
Big question I know, but its a critical perception point I think.
If you're defining bitcoin as the leading product for "people who love freedom", I might agree with you. However if you think a large corporation can't fork the project and have a much more widely accepted (and thus more valuable) payments competitor in a very short time then I'd disagree. Facebook Credits, or Google bits, or MSFTMoney or whatever would have 10-100x the acceptance almost immediately. Most of the 600+ million users of Facebook don't care about Libertarianism, anarchy, anonymity, deflation or whatever else drew most of us to bitcoin. However if they can transact on Facebook easily, quickly and with little transactions cost then they will be very satisfied with the FacebookBits. And if Facebook expands their payments system to the rest of the web, as they seem inclined to do with their other offerings, then bitcoin will lose a lot of it's raison d'etre. |
|
|
|
|
I know little about software and even less about hardware, so I'd like to hear if this idea is viable or pie-in-the-sky.
Imagine you are going through the drive-through at your local McDonald's/Tim Horton's/Dunkin' Donuts to pick up your morning coffee. When you arrive at the ordering point the restaurant senses a transponder in your vehicle attached to an Android/iPhone that identifies you. When you get to the pickup window the cashier hands you your order and the cash-register automatically debits your bitcoin wallet via the transponder for the amount of your purchase.
Basically it is doing the same thing as transponders for toll highways. However what I am proposing is that a single transponder could serve for purchases at multiple different vendors.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
