|
So, first the U.S. loses the war against those natives. As a result these natives got total ownership of the land. The place was even supposed to be "closed to all whites".
Then later, the U.S. found a strategic method to counter-attack: they kill all buffaloes in the area. So the native could not rely on this as a resource for food, shelter and clothing. So finally, the U.S. won.
And now, almost two hundred years later, a white man complains on TED. How weird.
When you lose, it's done. Game over. Complaining is not an effective way of turning a defeat into a victory.
|
|
|
|
I think there is actually no big problem with using Bitcoin on Mars. It just needs a bit of additional work: - it's not always possible to communicate directly with mars. there is this big thing called "sun" inbetween! i.e. for a permanent mars base, we need additional relay satellites.
- i could envision a central server at mars, that acts as a clearing station for all transactions.
- double spends on mars and in parallel on earth are possible, but would be detected in less than half an hour.
- for the entire lifespan of bitcoin, the mining power on earth will very likely be much higher than on mars. so, mining over there won't make much sense in the first place.
Agreed. |
|
|
|
I'm of the "continued self-guided human evolution through technology" camp, as opposed to "we're all going to die through a Terminator scenario" camp. Though I guess we won't really be the same humans once that all happens.
That's what I meant. Humans as an organic species will probably disappear but human culture will survive through the machines and AI it will have created. Transition will happen more or less peacefully, not in a man-vs-machine war. |
|
|
|
so we could inhabitate other planets later on. There are no other planets. And extra-solar is just too far away. Venus, Mercury, plenty of very large moons. I obviously meant "no other planets we might consider colonizing" |
|
|
|
since it will be impossible to mine the same blockchain on both Earth and Mars,
I'm not sure it's so obvious. Light takes a few minutes to travel from mars to earth. It's the same order of magnitude than the target delay between bitcoin blocks. Does that mean earth and mars could not mine the same blockchain? Not so sure. Time delay would not be an issue for each planet, providing they don't wait for confirmation from one another before starting mining the new block found locally. And that's pretty much how the current protocol already work, isn't? Surely it would increase the amount of chain forking, and it might take more time for them to resolve, but nothing would be very different from how bitcoin currently works. Well, I think so anyway. |
|
|
|
Well, it is not certain for all megafauna, but it is pretty much sure for a lot of large animals, such as aurochs, Moa, thylacine, and so on. Many fascinating creatures have been wiped out by humans in the last thousands years, and that is kind of sad indeed. On what basis are you classifying the thylacine as "megafauna"? I don't. I was merely talking about "large animals", which is a non-scientific, subjective expression. |
|
|
|
Sounds far fetched, but Virgin and other companies are seriously looking into mining in space already.
Indeed they are looking into it, but honestly I don't understand why. If you really want to mine stuff, I'm pretty sure it would be cheaper to mine sea floor than asteroids. |
|
|
|
(Anybody knows this theory:
Assuming perpetual exponential growth of human population is silly. In several developed countries people don't even renew generations. It seems that the more advanced civilizations are, the less children they make. Talking to yourself?  Wrong editing of my post. |
|
|
|
Your post includes much conjecture, and should be presented as such: Sad thing is there where large Animals almost in every region in the world. Mammoth and Rhinoceros in Europe, Elephants in America and even 3 meter Marsupials in Australia. They all disappeared when the first humos showed up, probably possibly due to them beeing easy prey. A Mammoth didn't fear humans. The only region they survived (on a larger scale) is Africa because this is where Humans evolved and the animals might have "learned" to view us as the threat we are.
Sorry, of course it should. It's a controversial theory after all. Wasn't my intention to present it as facts. Well, it is not certain for all megafauna, but it is pretty much sure for a lot of large animals, such as aurochs, Moa, thylacine, and so on. Many fascinating creatures have been wiped out by humans in the last thousands years, and that is kind of sad indeed. |
|
|
|
the fact that we might get extinct by some stupid accident some day might be incentive to put a lot of resources in the establishment of a self-sustaining settlement either in Space or another planet/moon.
Does it, really? From a philosophical point of view, it's not obvious that we should make lots of efforts into preventing our extinction. After all, if such an extinction happens, it will only concern future generations. I'm not sure I understand why preceding generations should bother. (Anybody knows this theory:
If there is a first man (pick any) and a last man (due to irreversible nature of entropy there will be), a random man (you?) is in the second half of all men with … 50% probability. So with 100.000.000 humans having lived before you and the next 100M being born in the next 100 years, the last human might just be around the corner with 50% certainty. With continued exponential growth the 99% probability for extinction would not be 1000 years.
Assuming perpetual exponential growth of human population is silly. In several developed countries people don't even renew generations. It seems that the more advanced civilizations are, the less children they make. |
|
|
|
so we could inhabitate other planets later on. There are no other planets. And extra-solar is just too far away. |
|
|
|
It's said that bitcoin people think outside the box, now, imagine in the future, do you think that there will be possible to move anything (including radio signals) faster than the speed of light?
Alcubierre’s idea: bending space-time in front of and behind a vessel rather than attempting to propel the vessel itself at light-speeds.
You need to put dark energy in front of your spaceship and nobody knows how to make some. We don't even know what is this stuff. So, the universe is wast, perhaps there's already other civilizations that have created interplanetary communication technologies, perhaps we one day will get in touch with them, and start using their technology ? Well, we try to find them with SETI, but no results so far. There are also reasons to believe that it will be impossible to contact a civilization if it's more than about an hundred light-years away (the radio signal would be much too weak). We would be very lucky if more than one technologically advanced civilization had developed in such a small neighborhood, and in the same time frame. Also, one day, our sun will stop shining, and by that time, if mankind is not extinkt, we would need to find somewhere else to live, and it would be logical to think that we would need to inhabitate more than one planet on our quest to inhabitate the universe. :p Earth will stay inhabitable for about five hundred million years. That's a lot. IMHO, humanity as we know it will almost certainly NOT exist in ten thousand years. Or if it still exists, it won't matter much because it won't be the most intelligent life form anymore. Humans will be over-powered by machines, who might just keep them as pets or something. And for a machine, the concept of being "inhabitable" is much different than for a human. Also, it's not unthinkable that in say a couple of hundred years from now, maybe before that we have bases with people living on mars, the moon and so on.
Human will not live on mars or the moon, for the same reasons nobody lives in Antarctica, Sahara or on deep ocean floors. We're just not built for that. Why would you like to spend tons of money to settle down in such an hostile environment, anyway? In the future, there will probably be astronauts that will be willing to dedicate their entire life for space exploration, it is also possible to imagine that a giant self sustainable space station would travel through space, while hosting a complete and sustainable eco-system for hundreds or thousands of years until it finds an inhabitable planet. We don't need to send humans for exploration. Robotic probes will do it as they currently do. If we send humans, it will mainly be symbolic, for fun essentially. Spatial hiking will be some kind of a very expensive leisure activity. |
|
|
|
You can use bitcoin over there if you don't mind somewhat slower propagation to and from Earth.
Of course you won't mind. I mean, it would be used for commercial exchanges between mars and earth and goods would take months or years to ship anyway. So it won't matter if payments take a few hours or even days. |
|
|
|
My goodness this is good news. Good piece of information there  Come on. ISS is in Low Earth Orbit. So about 400km above sea level. Using internet through such a distance is no big deal. And internet signals pass through space all the time anyway, since they are often relayed by communication satellites. |
|
|
|
mega internet lag to update the blockchain. plus why would they need money on mars.
They could need Earth money in order to buy stuff from Earth. |
|
|
|
It takes about 15 minutes for a roundtrip to Mars.
So what? The very point of bitcoin is to be able to overcome synchronization delays due to network latency. |
|
|
|
Wasn't the world great when it had more oxygen in the atmosphere... I'm pretty sure the oxygen levels at that time were not much different than today. I think it was during Paleozoic that they were much higher. It's true though that before Holocene there used to be all kinds of large animals everywhere, but on the other hand the largest animal who's ever lived on earth still lives today. |
|
|
|
L'affaire CIC vs MACARAJA (Mtgox) ne parle pas de ce point mais se concentre sur le fait que mtgox a voulu exercer, sans licence d'aucune sorte, une profession reglementée. Le point qui posait problème est le fait que mtgox ouvrait des comptes à des tiers pour y déposer des fonds, ce qui est le monopole des banques et établissements de paiement (au sens de la directive Européenne sur les services de paiement, ou DSP).
D'ailleurs quelle est la position de bitcoin-central sur ce point? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
