I hope they don't ban internet. I won't have work then if I ever graduate... Though, maybe I have to go to horrible telco business instead... But I like the internet protocols more...  |
|
|
|
|
Finland.
Pretty much against paying other peoples failings, that is countries and banks. Cyprus is a step to better direction, but too late.
Personally, we should have let the system crash and burn and start fresh...
|
|
|
|
"Bitcoin will take over as the currency of the internet. It will also take over as a store of value; why earn a measly, less-than-inflation interest rate in a savings account when you can have steady appreciation of value if you just keep your money in bitcoin? People will spend less and save more because they know if only they do that, they will be richer in the future. Companies will no longer produce things of no value, because no one will buy them. The world will become more efficient, because there will be less waste. Everyone will realize how much they lose by spending money on valueless things. There will be a more equitable distribution of wealth, because no one can inflate (or, to use a less charitable term, counterfeit) bitcoin at their whim."- Ryan Dickherber. Bitcoin is the Economic Singularity. 2011-06-04 http://themonetaryfuture.blogspot.com/2011/06/bitcoin-is-economic-singularity.html Wouldn't majority of people be worse off in that kind of society. I'm not entirely sure how large part of population is needed to sustain the food and minimal production of other must have services. Can't be very large. Also, this does go for speding deflationary currency. Most people prefer to have pleasure now than much later. |
|
|
|
UN? Let me laugh. Do you know whose permission they need to do anything important? Yeah...
UN is quite toothless really. When it comes to those with true power in it...
You make a point. But human rights concerns would arise from other countries if the US infringed on the right to self-determination. You... haven't been following the news lately, have you? You mean ever? |
|
|
|
I think inclusion bugs and quirks of satoshi client in spec will be counter-productive.
Spec should be "clean" and will take effect at some point in the future. By that date, everyone should upgrade their clients.
Probably only good solution. Define the spec. Test it with bounties after general testing and do hard-fork at certain point. Preferably at this point there is multiple implementations and pools use different implementations. |
|
|
|
|
UN? Let me laugh. Do you know whose permission they need to do anything important? Yeah...
UN is quite toothless really. When it comes to those with true power in it...
|
|
|
|
I think the Pi used in this would be multiples faster  But that's not the point is it |
|
|
|
|
So what could happen is that big institutions will write a new spec for alt coin and start it fresh. Or someone else might do this.
That is one option. The idea works, but current implementation seems to be lacking... For wide scale...
|
|
|
|
Conclusion: What I did is just a precaution. The bank does not pay me anything for keeping my money. I lose nothing if I take it out. I will spend it in my business in approx. 3-4 weeks even if nothing happens. If everyone did the same, there would be same hell here as in Cyprus.
Are you saying that banks don't pay interest in Finland or that the interest is at or below the rate of inflation so the interest doesn't stop the real value of your savings from decreasing? I think for regular people it's around 0.250% for spending accounts. Of course you have saving accounts with better interest, but then also can't use at any time. EDIT: For my bank if minimum balance is over 5k, the interest is bank's prime - 3%... So 0.250% really... |
|
|
|
This newfangled BTC thingie is so deflationary that no-one will spend them. Apparently they need to increase the blocksize because no-one is spending them.
So what part of it isn't get rich schemes and gambling |
|
|
|
|
This leads to question: Can deflating currency gain spenders? Ones that do spend their coins?
Slight deflation should be pretty normal in future, productivity is likely to increase still. If this rate is sufficiently low, there isn't too many incentives to move spending later. Though at current rates...
|
|
|
|
|
Neither ponzi or a pyramid. Might be bubble. Can't say until it collapses for final time... If it collapses...
|
|
|
|
|
Why not just log every transaction which you know the other party? Much simpler way. The transactions are traceable mostly anyway.
Also I don't think there is any mechanism to reverse transactions. And not accepting bad transactions is unhealthy...
|
|
|
|
|
How do you separate good and bad and what levels of tainted coins is acceptable? Why wouldn't someone just go collect some very tainted coins, and then dust a many good addresses.
Problem really is that once you have transaction the coins are yours. And if client's flag it the receiving address is also bad. Tough luck if you didn't use fresh one... I just see too many problems and issues...
Tracking the stuff is all fine, but not-accepting them is hard and destructive...
|
|
|
|
|
Probably not legally... On other hand it seems to be kinda big for some people here...
So, I wouldn't think it would pass in any court anywhere.
Even if I feel that some people believe in it bit too much...
|
|
|
|
Russia defaulted in 1998 They seem to be doing ok. Maybe the US should do the same?  But they got oil and gas and are oppressing other countries... Oh wait |
|
|
|
Such ideas and a scheme I reckon is possible and do'able. It is done now, constantly, around the globe, by corporations. What is needed to remove the monopoly that governments have and move the existing 'market competition' style into each nations states/councils/counties, allowing each that takes part to compete and grow.
Ye, anyway, I think it would work under conditions,
1. You must have at least 2 'areas' willing to take part in this new 'wages/taxes heaven scheme' (so they can compete).
2. Allow each area to set its own taxes/wages/laws/education/health system/sciences/etc
3. Must abide by basic human rights.
How is this different from current situation apart from scale? And how you enforce human rights, and what are they considered to be? |
|
|
|
|
It very complex mess. With various countries and their politicians playing for both national and international(EU level) personal goals. They want both look good in their nations by playing though and getting gains and on other hand I believe they are corrupt and try to get EU jobs by making pro EU choices.
Too many players, too many goals. And everyone plays for own team or for oneself... And unworkable system. A quick crash and debt reset might have fixed problem for a while...
|
|
|
|
Maybe they want money in Russia, so they can do the same |
|
|
|
It just seems foolish to me that someone could have tastes or beliefs of how disgusting or unfortunate the lower classes are, while essentially encouraging a system that creates lower classes.
The problem is, we're assuming fiat will still be a thing and the only thing we're replacing here is taxation. Given the current state of America, this will run into a problem of the poor being unable to fund their own projects, while the rich live away from the poor in their mansions and beautiful cities for rich-onlies. In order for a no-taxation system to work, you've first gotta get rid of government, which keeps the circle of rich-being-rich and poor-being-poor going. Let's assume, instead, that we're in a capitalistic society in which Bitcoin is the popular currency, and due to it being deflationary, people earn wealth, rather than releasing debts. Thus, those who save will cease to be quite as poor, so long as they don't let go of their digital gold to some hooker with a referral to a ponzi scheme, and those who are rich will have actual wealth, as opposed to the silliness of what we have now. At this point, when regulation and patents are nixed, all that can be done is to educate the masses (and I mean real education,) and pray they don't allow themselves to slip into another scheme like the one we're in right now. Used to be, you were poor because you made poor decisions. Today, unless you're born into wealth, you're poor by default, and will likely remain poor. Workers will need to feel they're worth MUCH more than their time is currently worth, which can be accomplished by first abolishing the minimum wage. Minimum wage assumes that $7.25 is actually a living wage. Obama wants to increase this to $9, and I still don't call this a living wage, especially when considering wages are not competing with inflation. Without minimum wage, people would (hopefully) fight for better wages (since there's no substandard invisible bar that $7.25 is better than nothing.) In the end, people fund the rich. Without the poor, the rich cannot be rich, yet very few seem to acknowledge this to its fullest extent: it's as if you could scream it at the top of your lungs and it still wouldn't ring as true. The poor must stand up for themselves, and demand higher wages from those with extreme wealth. Without a government to protect the rich, it will actually be possible. As it stands, it is not, and the poor continue to be exploited for they spend too much time working to ever know the difference of their circumstance and how swiftly it can change. Forgive me, for I don't mean to come off as hypocritical; I'm speaking in hypotheticals, mostly for fun  Wasn't there some part of this going on in different ways in different parts in 20th century... I always worry about the actual power of poor people. They do need to eat and might need some heating source... And these aren't trivial needs for large population. And then there is power... Everything is complicated... Any way I'm cynical pessimist... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
