|
We just decided to write all our forum posts as "we". It helps us get the respect we deserve.
|
|
|
|
|
Damn! I was just about to go to bed! Grrrrr Bitcoin!
|
|
|
|
Here's my two satoshis... Forgive me if this was already posted, but I had a similar conversation with a friend of mine about Bitcoin and this was my response.
Bitcoin, as far as I understand it, can never work like the MOTB, because the payment system described by the MOTB is actually the opposite of Bitcoin. Think about it this way: the MOTB requires the store or whatever to scan you and deduct the money from your account, whereas Bitcoin requires the person to *send* the money to the store.
Since the two systems essentially are polar opposites, my response to my friend was that Bitcoin is actually the last great chance humanity has to adopt a system that could run counter to a MOTB scheme.
What *could* become the MOTB is something like Canada's MintChip. Does this make sense? What are your guys' thoughts?
At least the bitcoin we have today will never ever function as a tool for all transactions worldwide. Insofar we are safe from being forced to do every transaction via the blockchain. |
|
|
|
I really see a problem at the moment as Fincen regulation kind of forces you to stay in Bitcoin (not trade for fiat), we have kind of a problem to bootstrap bitcoin further. Sure, so far it is just one country and just a joke of a regulation when it comes to enforcement but this fiat-gateway is what we have to get rid of asap. Think of it: If you want to cut the state out of the loop, you have to be "all in" and do all your business in bitcoins. A long way to go for most people to do so. If you are all in and only cash out for your daily needs, you touch exchanges that are under total control by national states. This can only be broken by concepts like zerocoin or some smart and risky laundering of coins with existing methods. I did not read much into zerocoin but the concept is very very intriguing and according to all I know about zero knowledge protocols (pun not intended  ) this could really work so I hope it gets implemented asap! |
|
|
|
|
Lol. Travian. I tried to convince the relevant people (CEO, Head of Payment) when I still worked there in 2011. There was no interest at all. Maybe I should ask again but I have my doubts.
I mean I didn't approach it as my one big goal but brought it up in small talk situations and there was general interest in Bitcoin with some people but not with respect to Travian Payment.
|
|
|
|
Despite what you may read about the forum, unconfirmed transactions work plenty well enough for this sort of thing.
What if you send a 0-fee TX that doesn't exceed the priority threshold, so it will sit unconfirmed for days, but then you are able to double spend it back to another address of yours with a fee when you get back home? Of course there are risks. But how often would this happen? 1. If you do a double spend in a shop or a bar, you will never shop there again or drink a beer there again 2. We are not talking about values of 1000nds of $ here, but a normal Bill at a bar or shop 3. If that's you reasoning as a shop owner, you should also not accept Credit Cards, because the person could always do a charge back later or the Credit doesn't have any backing 4. The normal user isn't even able to do a double spend and it will get less and less the more Bitcoin goes mainstream, but everyone can do a CC charge back or pay without having enough backing on his account. In addition there is always the "risk" that your transaction actually confirms. If your transaction doesn't contain the minimum fee, it will not be relayed to the shop owner neither. |
|
|
|
Can someone explain to me why many people use millibitcoin instead of actual bitcoin? I saw some people talk about it but I still don't get what makes it 'better'? Isn't it essentially just BTC/1000?
In a few years time we will use μBTC (micro bitcoins) in every day conversations  Ok, TheKoziTwo just said essentially the same thing while I was writing but with a bias more towards the scammy manipulative thing that I don't like, so I post my version anyway: There are several things at play. First, people very reasonably try to avoid insignificant zeros: If Bitcoins are worth $34,238,712/Ƀ the average Joe will not care about the last 6 digits and the average trader will not care about the last 4 or 5 digits so they will rather want to talk about $34,239/mɃ or $34.2/μɃ. At the other end of the scale you don't want to buy your chewing gum for 0.000,032Ƀ but rather see a quote of 32μɃ. Ok, so that was the convenience part of the story. Unfortunately there are also some people that advocate to use mɃ to make it seam cheaper to buy in. Their reasoning is that people think in full units so they rather buy something that costs $0.12 than something that costs $120 regardless of the quantity they are buying later. I tend to disagree with this approach but know it kind of works. LTC are valued at $4 with a x4 supply that would translate to $16 for Bitcoin. Ok historically $4 and $16 fell in short succession in the bitcoin world but still, the LTC is considered by many as BTC ignoring the fact that there are 4 times more of them, so for the LTC-scammers this trick worked. Well, as I said I still lean towards not using tricks as Bitcoin doesn't need to fool its users. |
|
|
|
|
Apologies if this was mentioned before. Just joining this long long thread now …
I really love bitcoinity.org/markets and especially the red/green-update as these jittery lines from before or from other charts don't add much value but I have a suggestion for that yellow line. I assume the red + greed area is where actual trades took place and the yellow line is kind of a slow pace snapshot, right? That would make the yellow line kind of random. Wouldn't it make more sense to have the yellow line show the timeframe's vwap?
|
|
|
|
I signed up and submitted an application to become a seller. (I'm selling wallpapers.) How long can I expect to wait for approval?
On a related matter I would like to know how long it takes to get questions answered here and how the backlog issue is evolving in general. |
|
|
|
extremly low volume. Its mean that crash is just around the corner.
So when the price goes up to $165-170 can I point out how wrong you were? You can point out whatever in this thread but nobody would read it as the thread is tooooooo fast. I want additional buttons for users here like the ignore button. Market expert, Manipulator and Clueless idiot. These buttons and the resulting feedback could be hidden outside the speculation subforum. |
|
|
|
You can always add bitcoin to your android app, and publish it on an alternative store (not googles play store). Maybe amazon store, getjar, f-droid or simply self publish it.
Fdroid ... only open source Amazon ... same system as Google Google ... 99.9% market share So there really is no alternative to getting along with Google. |
|
|
|
|
Damn, I wanted to add Bitcoin to my app, too and kind of remember it was something along the line of "alternative ways of payment are ok as long as there is a way to pay through google and this is not more expensive" aka. as long as you also allow users to pay via google, they don't mind you accepting PayPal or Bitcoin etc.
|
|
|
|
I've been using BitcoinSpinner for a while now and like it quite a bit. I think I've read through most of this thread, so I apologize if I missed the answer to this: What happens if the backend server goes away? Can I still retrieve my coins somehow?
If the answer is no, then the one feature I'd like to request is the ability to change the backend server that the app connects to (and if a special backend server is needed, can that software be open sourced?). In the event that you and/or your server go away, I would hate to loose access to whatever coins I have stored in my wallet. Would something like that even be possible?
So now that you read this thread, join us on the other thread. Yes, I suggested to lock either but they are both live. |
|
|
|
oh i guess my avatar isn't safe for work probably....
If you work at the FED, yeah, it is NSFW |
|
|
|
With your graceful permission, I will repost here my recent findings. Summary: Bitcoin could act as the world's reserve currency in 2013 and after, as gold did in 1913 and prior. This would give BTC1 = $300,000 in present dollars. Please comment on the analysis, not the outcome. Oh, ok so you say if Ƀ surpasses the $300,000 mark in 2013 $$, we should sell? Thanks for the heads up I kind of appreciate your argument but don't agree on the outcome as there will always be a speculative aspect to it. 7.11 billion people? Hey, I have some extra money and will speculate on the next 8 billion also wanting ɃɃ, so the value should be $600,000. Oh no please, that's why I said read the analysis first. Adding 8 billion people will likely not change the outcome. Ok I read it again assuming I must have skipped that part but I don't see it. Where in your analysis is the argument that the value of Bitcoin would not go up if it was the one world currency for twice as many people than before? |
|
|
|
With your graceful permission, I will repost here my recent findings. Summary: Bitcoin could act as the world's reserve currency in 2013 and after, as gold did in 1913 and prior. This would give BTC1 = $300,000 in present dollars. Please comment on the analysis, not the outcome. Oh, ok so you say if Ƀ surpasses the $300,000 mark in 2013 $$, we should sell? Thanks for the heads up I kind of appreciate your argument but don't agree on the outcome as there will always be a speculative aspect to it. 7.11 billion people? Hey, I have some extra money and will speculate on the next 8 billion also wanting ɃɃ, so the value should be $600,000. |
|
|
|
[...]
Hmm, not quite right neither …
[/s]
Edit:
for(Bid bid:bids) {
weighted_bid_price+=bid.price_per_BTC * bid.volume_USD;
}
weighted_bid_price/=total_bid_sum;
for(Ask ask:asks) {
weighted_ask_price+=ask.price_per_BTC * ask.volume_BTC;
}
weighted_ask_price/=total_ask_sum;
Would that work?
What if... I would offer 1BTC for 1 Billion Dollars? You would have to wait 5 years for your order to get filled Ok, seriously, there has to be some nice measure. If the average bid/ask doesn't work, take the mean bid/ask: for(Bid bid:bids) {
bidSum += bid.volumeUSD;
if (bidSum >= 0.5 * totalBidSum) {
meanBidPrice = bid.pricePerBTC;
break;
}
}
for(Ask ask:asks) {
askSum += ask.volumeBTC;
if (askSum >= 0.5 * totalAskSum) {
meanAskPrice = ask.pricePerBTC;
break;
}
}
meanSpreak = meanAskPrice – meanBidPrice;
|
|
|
|
No. They were found by miners of that pool, not the pool itself. If the pool misbehaves (the blocks contain only transactions with high fees or the blocks contain no transactions at all etc.) these miners will switch within hours.
I wonder though why the first ASIC miners are not solo mining. Damn you can afford to do it with a block found on average within hours.
Some of them seem to have a psychological objection to variance. Or maybe the theory is that as more asics come online, the pools will regain their importance so some loyalty is in order. My reasoning behind pool or p2p mining as opposed to solo had my ASIC turned up months ago and had difficulty been low enough would have been: The odds of mining a block reduces at the same rate as difficulty increases and if this is rapid the cost of belonging to a pool pays for a share of the gains when difficulty is lower and odds are higher. It's a bigger gamble to go solo because if you're unlucky in the first low-difficulty stage you've missed out on the gain you would had by having yours plugged in before the others who drove the difficulty up. Crap. If you solo mine, you can also be lucky and earn more than with a pool. It's just more variance and being more lucky now or less is absolutely the same now and later in the game but later your odds of finding 2 blocks per day might be half of today. |
|
|
|
Does anyone here worry about the concentration of hash power? 6 of the last 7 blocks have been found by BTC Guild. This is beginning to worry me.
No. They were found by miners of that pool, not the pool itself. If the pool misbehaves (the blocks contain only transactions with high fees or the blocks contain no transactions at all etc.) these miners will switch within hours. I wonder though why the first ASIC miners are not solo mining. Damn you can afford to do it with a block found on average within hours. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
