Good luck convincing people to accept 0 Confirmations, will never happen with normal mom and pop. Secondly, for the transaction to even show up sometimes is takes a minute or longer. So even 0 Confirms are slower than Visa.
So basically I'm right, because your original claim was about the protocol, and now you're making a claim about psychology (which is as trivial a fix as what terminology an end-user client displays). Which is it? |
|
|
|
|
Monetary deflation is only viewed as negative in the milleu of conventional macroeconomics because for the kinds of currencies that they are looking at, deflation is an indicator for impending economy-wide demand collapse.
Deflation in this context without those conditions is a completely different phenomenon, because prices reach an equilibrium where time preferences are incorporated.
|
|
|
|
|
Seriously, you people need to bone up on what the blockchain actually is, and what confirmations actually mean, because this is all complete nonsense.
|
|
|
|
Nope, Bitcoin as a protocol can't function for instant transactions, it needs to be reworked from the ground up, pretty much creating a new crypto currency, by the time that happens, if it ever happens, the new "wondercoin" has crushed it.
No. It's already better than any existing payment network for instant transactions right out of the gate. |
|
|
|
Because wait please explain to me the benefit of waiting 30 hours to make sure my order is confirmed instead of a few seconds using a credit card? Anonymity!! Guess what when bitcoin becomes "mainstream" which it never will for the very fact that it takes forever to confirm any normal transaction.
A zero confirmation transaction whose inputs are practically instantaneously validated against the blockchain is already beneficial to a merchant beyond any service VISA or any other payment system offers, because the credit card transaction is reversible at any time within a month. Waiting for the confirmations only protects against an attempted double-spend attack, which only is relevant in the real world proportional to the amount of money being spent. I re-iterate, credit cards are already inferior to Bitcoin for point-of-sale transactions without ANY confirmations whatsoever. |
|
|
|
|
So let me get this straight.
The NSA created a revolutionary disruptive technology that is likely to fundamentally threaten the power of the very entities that they are in the business of protecting?
|
|
|
|
Not really, if you are heavily invested in bitcoin it would a primary concern.
The world got by before the Internet, bitcoin didn't.
The world of 2013 does not get by without the internet. |
|
|
|
well the problem is that if the internet went down, the price for BTC would completely crash as fewer people would believe in it or have access to it.
If the internet went down, the price of BTC would be the least of your worries. |
|
|
|
|
They can make whatever they want legal or illegal, what does it matter if they can't actually stop people from using Namecoin?
|
|
|
|
|
Third-party adoption is not a requirement for Bitcoin's success, it's actually the opposite cause and effect.
If Bitcoin continues developing and thriving, third parties will need to be in the game to survive. This is particularly true in highly-inefficient markets that are the low-hanging fruit of BTC adoption.
The first firms to go will be the Western Unions of the world, who are currently enjoying a ridiculous rent-seeking position that the blockchain immediately obliterates. Next are the big payment processors like VISA, because from a merchant's point of view, Bitcoin is massively technologically superior in very tangible economic terms. A zero confirmation transaction just validated by checking against the blockchain is already massively superior to any service VISA actually offers to merchants, and just one confirmation is something that VISA can't even match in the span of a whole month.
Bitcoin does not need these accessory industries. These accessory industries will need Bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
|
I find this entire article completely without substance.
Every single claim made in the article is something that immediately dawns on any student with any cursory familiarity with quantum phenomena, with or without the assistance of cannabis!
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin is not a currency because it is not a unit. It has to be definable it has to be equal to something. An inch is not real but it is definable.
This whole conceptual construct is faulty, but just to humor this "unit" nonsense that has nothing to do with anything but looking up something in the dictionary then making stuff up -- A Bitcoin is a unit of what you can transact that the network will accept as legitimate and incorporate into the blockchain. |
|
|
|
Hitting that price is 100% dependant on Bitcoin being adopted by the mainstream and fully integrated into day-to-day life. Otherwise I don't see it happening. That is a tremendously high market cap, especially as the supply of bitcoin grows
That's 100% arbitrary, price is determined as the equilibrium of quantity demanded at a price versus quantity supplied at a price. When people talk about "market cap" for Bitcoin it's really a metaphor, it's not a real thing. Market capitalization applies to stocks and other instruments where there are "shares". There is no such thing strictly as a "market cap" for a currency. |
|
|
|
Now let's make a Big Assumption: people bandwagon on this new chain if it's at 48% in order to selfishly double spend when it finally takes over the old chain.
You do not understand what this article is saying. |
|
|
|
|
The logic behind all of this is a fallacious post ex facto statistical fantasy. If statistics show that you "found" a block during pool mining, that doesn't mean that if you were solo mining you would've found a block. The header on the block created by your pool versus the block you would've mined solo are different, therefore the hashes would have different nonces.
|
|
|
|
|
The paper is not about the 51% attack, it's actually far dumber.
The paper is basically saying that a large pool of miners would solve a block then start pre-mining the next block prior to submitting proof of work of the block they had just created.
|
|
|
|
First post here, pretty new to the Bitcoin scene. So I think (like most of you) the bitcoin movement is a fascinating experiment, but is too disorganized and not well polished enough to engender trust on a large, consumer scale. Not everyone is familiar with cryptography and is comfortable with using a string of random digits to use as their personal checking account. In many ways, it is (ironically) similar to a unique bank routing number, but the fact that it is not registered or tied to any one particular "trustworthy" party ends up spooking people. One of the reasons many people trust their very own banking institutions is because of the FDIC's $250,000 guarantee, i.e. it's government insured. Also, when you go to a bank, you can see and speak to an actual representative...The problem with Bitcoin, of course, is that its basic function almost mandates a disconnect from traditional banking sources. So how do we resolve this and foster more confidence in the system?
What you're talking about has nothing to do with any features of Bitcoin itself. It has to do with the emerging financial services industries that are and will continue emerging around Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
The way that the Bitcoin network organizes data into a structure using the laws of mathematics to designate value is no different in principle than the way that the physical laws of nature organize matter into a crystalline structure that is gold.
If the internet or Bitcoin network stopped operating Bitcoin would disappear the same way that the expanding red giant sun will destroy all gold on earth in less than 5 billion years. The underlying structural organization would fall into entropy because the underlying order producing that structure break down and get superseded.
|
|
|
|
You're saying that during Step 4a/4b, the money supply has grown?
That's correct, that's exactly how fractional reserve banking increases the money supply. |
|
|
|
|
Is there something else on the same USB controller that could be throttling it?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
