Even if casacius destroys any copy of the key, how can I know nobody scanned it on the way to me? They would have perfect deniability so why would they actually destroy any key at all? It is not possible to prove the destruction of keys.
I assume you know that the private key is sealed inside the coin, right? The number on the outside of the coin is just the bitcoin address prefix for looking it up. Unless somebody has some super duper spy-tech to see through the hologram/coin (or if you're talking about the keys I provide for roll-your-owns, which aren't sealed behind a hologram), they're not going to be able to read off your coin in transit without doing obvious visible damage to the hologram. So you take every coin back at the BTC price as long as the seal is not broken? Aka do you hope for these coins being traded like the real thing? Not that I had an x-ray at hands but I rather doubt that these coins will ever circulate much as it is far too tempting to get hands on the key. |
|
|
|
|
I wouldn't trust casascius with more money than I would trust instawallet and these are the ones I trust most in the respective areas.
casacius risks big trouble by touching any of his coins as he never knows which ones were unsealed.
instawallet could spend most of the customer's money before anybody would get suspicious.
both services serve me only to get bitcoins in the hands of noobs and never ever would I use any of these as a store of value.
Even if casacius destroys any copy of the key, how can I know nobody scanned it on the way to me? They would have perfect deniability so why would they actually destroy any key at all? It is not possible to prove the destruction of keys.
|
|
|
|
As a last resort, there can be some change to the protocol, but nothing as drastic as demurrage or PoS. Oh, don't be that sure. For me, PoS is a pretty logic thing to do and apart from people that invested a lot of money in mining hardware (BFL for example), the average user of bitcoin would profit a lot from PoS. Demurrage would be 100% contrary to why many of the people use bitcoin in the first place and would worsen the problems PoS would fix (too much money burned in mining). |
|
|
|
In case you wonder: The 4.4% are put into mining. So if the Freicoin-economy ever reaches a market cap like the USD, this is an insane amount that can not be reduced just like that. Even worse, at the start they most likely also have the 50 Freicoin block reward(?). And if they ever switch to proof of stake, the 4.4% flow right back to where they came from  I was thinking hard about how to implement demurrage in bitcoin but with anonymous account holders I doubt it is possible at all. If you don't give the 4.4% to anybody, it has straight no effect at all. For a serious effect it is actually by far too little anyway. The Wörgl had more demurrage per month. Also like stated in the article, who would ever accept decent amounts in Freicoin? In Wörgl it was decided by law that people working for the city get this currency and all others had to accept it no matter what at a predefined exchange rate to the official currency. I love the Wörgl experiment but I doubt it is possible without a state or at least city running it in a similar way and as long as we don't implement pay to DNA it is not a bitcoin thing. |
|
|
|
http? so you switched off secure browsing to use a wallet app? does it work right now, cause here it doesn't. |
|
|
|
The Blockchain.info wallet sends coins to Facebook beautifully! I just used it yesterday, highly recommended.
Only with a fee for dust transactions. No way of going viral through facebook posts. |
|
|
|
Why the multiple threads?
People tend to think that by posting on the "Bitcoin Discussion" board will get them more views. Sorry, I didnt realize I made 2 threads. Feel free to delete the other one. I can't delete it. Also, it's the other one that is posted on the correct board. Well … don't know official policies but for tis long awaited feature it's the right board. Move it else where in a week. Long awaited feature that Tangible Cryptography have available for at least 2 months and that Spendbitcoins.com have available for more than 6 months? Is that what you're talking about? Doesn't seem the slightest bit innovative to me. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=90240.0https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=54896.0Also, this is my personal opinion, take as you wish. Bitinstant is NOT bitcoin. Their service is NOT a long awaited feature as it clearly existed long before. Their PR is better? Probably, but maybe that is because they are posting their threads in the wrong place. I don't use paypal but read of difficulties with bitcoin-paypal all the time here. If this is old news why did nobody put this feature in context? what is better? what is worse? |
|
|
|
gnah! a facebook wallet is cool cause it allows free transactions between facebook users outside the blockchain. Consequently your transactions will not show up in blockexplorer "as expected" but your depositing address will be "charged at random". This is built into bitcoind behaviour and Mathew you should know by now that that is not a sign of scam. Sending to Facebook IDs is also very convenient for users as they see their friend's face when sending. Fees should only apply when sending to a bitcoin address. (My concern was that if I grant every user to send single Satoshis to friends, these friends will scream "SCAM" when I charge them 1000000Satoshi for sending their belongings out.) I have a facebook app for bitcoin, too but did not dare to expose it to a wider audience. It's simple. Just a frontend to bitcoind with the facebook uid for the account. super slow but it works. https://bitcoin-app.com/ is UUUGLY as hell. https://apps.facebook.com/yougotcoin/ is broken (plain white). I will not use a hosted wallet where I don't trust the ones standing behind it. Ultimately I see it the job of some exchange to launch such an app. It can be done in one week of work to get far better than bitcoin-app. I would see it as a valuable investment in the future of bitcoin. Yes, facebook will ban it despite the fact it is not against anything I found in their TOS. The one doing the app should have a concept of continuing operations outside of facebook. Well done, this app could reach millions in a month and we could document how facebook destroyed a success story without a good reason and offer the more secure alternatives to the doubled user base. |
|
|
|
You can just use the new "watch" button Ah man, next couple weeks are going to be a real-world lesson in "old habits die hard." Somebody should start a thread where we all gamble on who is going to "sub" the most. ain't that the truth. I keep seeing the new, extra button under my usual clicky, clicky spot there for "show new replies to your posts". It screams to me, hey, check for the watch button ont he threads. I may practice with a few threads this evening and see what happens. ;p wish me luck. Oh, cool, thanx for letting me know Seams I'm one of today's lucky 10,000  |
|
|
|
Why the multiple threads?
People tend to think that by posting on the "Bitcoin Discussion" board will get them more views. Sorry, I didnt realize I made 2 threads. Feel free to delete the other one. I can't delete it. Also, it's the other one that is posted on the correct board. Well … don't know official policies but for tis long awaited feature it's the right board. Move it else where in a week. |
|
|
|
|
coinjedi I asked you in a private message without reply so far but I'm interested in a wider feedback anyway:
Would you mind me betting on you getting killed before Christmas 2012?
I have friends in Iran and for me every bet on them getting attacked feels just as sick. As you review every bet anyway, I would ask you to change your policy to not allow betting on events that involve a high probability of people getting killed.
I know that the betting volumes - or the market cap of bitcoin for that matter - are no incentive to start a war but I'm sure you would not feel comfortable if people bet only 0.1BTC on your death.
|
|
|
|
Wow I find it extremely expensive. The OP's survey had 14 questions. To get statistically relevant results we would have to spend 2100$. As I understand their advertisement, they ask the same user the full survey but over visiting several sites? As one question costs 10ct, I wonder if you can conclude the survey after "do you know bitcoin?" as knowing that 99% don't know bitcoin will make the rest 1% answers kind of statistically irrelevant. (I assume you can create subquestions. Everything else would be stupid.) Edit: Custom audience
Target a specific population like dog owners, moms, or golfers using a threshold question (e.g. "Do you own a dog?”).
$0.50 per response for follow-up questions to that audience or $750.00 for 1500 responses (recommended for statistical significance, minimum incidence rate of 5%) Assuming less than 1/5 of the general population qualifies to answer these bitcoin questions, this would make the survey 5 times more expensive. |
|
|
|
The issue with getting cash isn't a sign banks are going south (cash is a tiny fraction of a banks "assets" and "liabilities"). The amount of cash a bank can get you has no bearing on its solvency. What the issue does illustrate is the govt (not just US but all govt) attempt to marginalize cash. This process has been going on for 40+ years. Ever wonder why there is no bill larger than a $100? You could get a $100 bill in 1970 yet the largest bill you can get today is still $100 and it only has the purchashing power of <$20 (1970 dollars). They didn't get rid of the $100 bill in 1970 why isn't there a $500 bill today. In 1878 you could get cash in a 10,000 bill (there was at one time a 100K bill but it was a rare gold cert oddity so we will ignore it). Today $10K cash note may seem crazy but remember this was 1878. $10K in 1878 would be the equivalent of $317,682 today. Now the $10K note was pretty rare but lets look at a smaller not which remained in active circulation until 1968; the $500 bill. Since the $500 bill was discontinued the US govt hasn't discontinued any other bills and the $100 remains the largest bill. However due to inflation the purchashing power of the largest bill has gone down. $100 today is the equivalent of $15.14 in 1968.So in 1968 when they discontinued the $500, they chose to make the largest bill $100, not $50, or $20, or $10. Limiting largest bill to $10 may seem insane but due to inflation (and not introducing larger bills) that is exactly what the govt has done. The largest bill today has less purchashing power than a $20 bill when the govt decided to remove the $500 but keep the $100/$50/$20. The govt doesn't need to remove the $100 bill (and thus cash in general) inflation will eventually make it nearly worthless. It gets worse when you consider most ATM only dispense $20 and many places only accept $20 bills. $20 today is the equivelent of $3.07 in 1968. The fact that most places don't give/take bills larger than $20 is as outrageous as a store in 1968 saying " sorry we don't take large bills like $5 got any ones, or maybe a handful of coins". Had the govt simply stepped in and eliminated a cash there would have been a backlash. By letting inflation, bank cash limits, ATM denominations, and store policies do the work cash can be eliminated as a functional mechanism of exchange over time.  Funny So while some want to abandon the penny, they don't bother to abandon it cause they plan to abandon cash completely? Sounds logical to me. |
|
|
|
Sorry guys but Greece rushing to the BTC is nothing but wet dreams of you hoarders. The Greece can withdraw their cash and put it under their mattress. It's EUR after all. That will not devaluate tomorrow even if they turn to the XGD. As an expert I would never ever suggest on a national news outlet to save money in BTC as what would happen would be you getting all excited about the article buying the BTC to 20$ faster than any any Greek can type bitcoin.org, Greeks would buy it to 250$ and then you would get wet feet and sell high leaving the "saved Greeks" in the rain. In order to allow new people buy bitcoin, the same amount of BTC has to be sold. |
|
|
|
I love this, you can only buy miners with BTC and bankwire, so everyone gives Bitcoin away, BFL sells it all pushing down the price and forcing GPU miners out of the market, then 8 months later the difficulty increases exponentially as they "test" their ASIC on Inaba's pool, then they release it first to GigaVPS, who hypes up how "awesome" it is and single handedly mines a huge portion of the 3100btc/day till the next difficulty readjustment.
Then everyone after two weeks more who gets their devices finds their ROI is about 10 years. GG.
Very wise. I agree with this 100%. People don't have any idea what they are getting themselves into now. Better buy BTC than buy BFL mining gear. If BTC goes kaboom then both will be WORTHLESS. Nobody needs double SHA256 ASIC crap. But the difference is : buying BTC outright you have much more chance to make a huge $$$ when drop comes in Dec and BTC prices rise like mad. But disregard me, I can't wait to see the SHEEP get burned again, again and yet again ! what if you are a world bank? guess now would be a good time to consider mining (aka not all are only interested in max. ROI based on hardware/electricity costs and exchange rates.) |
|
|
|
*not* agreed at all! ok … partially agreed. If we had a monopoly, I would love to have order settlement once per 24h or once per week. Why should the price change faster than I can settle a purchase? As we will never have a monopoly, people will put their money where they can react in case of significant news and therefore the exchanges would only stop 24/7 upon being regulated.
(Actually a pause in price-making would definitely not increase stability as users would get nervous against that deadline on Friday. Also the exchanges would need extra capacities for the unnatural activity spikes.)
If the exchanges become regulated, which they should, the regulations will mandate equal protection for buyers and sellers. This may mean that trading cannot occur during periods of time when only one group of participants can deposit and withdraw, and the other group cannot. In other words, unless banks are open 24/7 bitcoin cannot trade 24/7. With these silly posts from you I think about betting on bitpay's bankrupcy over at betsofbitcoin. With equal rights for buyers and sellers we should delay all transactions to 2 weeks as that's what my deposits at gox took twice. Maybe the satoshi client should only accept blocks with at least 2 weeks old inputs? Omg what that would be secure!!1  (I guess it's the cold that put me in a trollish mood.) |
|
|
|
Options would be good if they are done correctly. They would provide a proper hedging mechanism to buy time to sell the coins in an efficient manner.
However, options contracts are only as good as the counterparty.
Markets are being very efficient today. It's over the weekends where the bias is lopsided to the downside. Sellers can add liquidity over the weekend, but buyers cannot!
It would actually be more stable for bitcoin if the markets would close for the weekend. People are used to the 24/7 operation, but the fact is it puts downward pressure on the price if only one side of the trade can put up money.
Agreed. If 6.30 holds for a day we should see a reversal to the upside throughout the week. WTF!?!? So you discuss dumping this amount soon publicly and tell in the same thread that you have no intention of manipulating anything in your own favor? That doesn't compute somehow. |
|
|
|
Options would be good if they are done correctly. They would provide a proper hedging mechanism to buy time to sell the coins in an efficient manner.
However, options contracts are only as good as the counterparty.
Markets are being very efficient today. It's over the weekends where the bias is lopsided to the downside. Sellers can add liquidity over the weekend, but buyers cannot!
It would actually be more stable for bitcoin if the markets would close for the weekend. People are used to the 24/7 operation, but the fact is it puts downward pressure on the price if only one side of the trade can put up money.
Agreed. If 6.30 holds for a day we should see a reversal to the upside throughout the week. *not* agreed at all! ok … partially agreed. If we had a monopoly, I would love to have order settlement once per 24h or once per week. Why should the price change faster than I can settle a purchase? As we will never have a monopoly, people will put their money where they can react in case of significant news and therefore the exchanges would only stop 24/7 upon being regulated. (Actually a pause in price-making would definitely not increase stability as users would get nervous against that deadline on Friday. Also the exchanges would need extra capacities for the unnatural activity spikes.) |
|
|
|
And so another bitcoin business went bankrupt  As a payment processor I guessed you were supposed to immediately sell BTC that you receive on an exchange. Apparently you were hoarding as the price was supposed to go up and now you need to sell at 6.5$ but can't? Come on! Announcing to deposit 50k BTC for a good reason at least tries to calm those that see a drop of confidence in a flooded market but I'm not sure the sharks will be happy to buy your coins at 6.5$ |
|
|
|
|
two sites come to mind here. betsofbitcoin and satoshidice. the former should find a way to make this real, the latter should give a hint on how to prevent running into legal issues.
imagine somebody on darknet made public some vanity addresses 1bet.... that turn out to return shares based on real world events. it could be such that you bet on hundreds of events and hundreds of possible outcomes without an official entity operating it. once i get a copy of the addresses and rules, i can play as long as somebody bothers keeping the script alive anywhere in the world.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
