Bitcoin Forum
January 28, 2022, 04:10:11 PM *
News: Vote on the 2021 community awards
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 »
1  Bitcoin / Legal / Re: IRS's new guidelines for taxing crypto-currencies on: May 17, 2014, 06:05:16 PM
Ever heard of Civil Obedience?...

Actually no, I've always paid more attention to the other side.  Cheesy
Civil Obedience?
At least I learned something new today.

With the help of computers, will BTC Civil Obedience actually burden the IRS enough to make a difference?


This will depend on how popular BTC becomes. If a significant number of Americans each submit a few hundred or even thousand capital gains transactions each for relatively small amounts it will have an impact. Contrary to popular assumptions tax agencies do not have unlimited funds and their mandate is to raise money for the state not spend it. If the paperwork burden gets bad enough where there is no significant return in taxes collected, they will change the rules to something more sensible where there is a threshold below which transactions are not reportable as is the case with foreign currency.

By the way I live in Canada and the CRA is doing a similar thing. They will learn just give them some time. It is interesting to see some tax agencies in Europe backtrack on VAT and BTC. The UK comes to mind here. In the meantime I am for tracking every satoshi and do not forget to claim those BTC network fees.  Wink



It's no different then Schedule D for stock buys/sales.

There's people who submit Schedule D forms THOUSANDS of pages long. Nobody actually looks at the individual lines unless they suspect something's wrong with it.

I've personally submitted a schedule D form 10+ pages long. It was auto generated by my broker. The IRS doesn't look at each line, they only look at the total (which I'm responsible for calculating).

That's right. I guess no one here actually realizes that auditing is a very small percentage of what the IRS does. I think it's like 5-7% of the returns are audited. If you fill out these ridiculously long forms hoping that a human is going to read it then you're killing a tree for no reason.

They added a bunch more employees to transition the Obamacare program and when that's running smooth they can start digging into auditing Bitcoin returns with those extra employees. If they don't find anything irregular within the first few years then no one will ever read those Bitcoin returns again. They will just accept the bottom line you entered and file it away. You will be the only one inconvenienced by the extra work.

Yeah, it's more like

"Yep, the required paperwork is here" *checks it off the list*

If you DON'T file the required paperwork, there's a high chance you get flagged for audit as a result, THEN they'll start looking at individual line items.
2  Bitcoin / Legal / Re: IRS's new guidelines for taxing crypto-currencies on: May 17, 2014, 08:18:37 AM
Ever heard of Civil Obedience?...

Actually no, I've always paid more attention to the other side.  Cheesy
Civil Obedience?
At least I learned something new today.

With the help of computers, will BTC Civil Obedience actually burden the IRS enough to make a difference?


This will depend on how popular BTC becomes. If a significant number of Americans each submit a few hundred or even thousand capital gains transactions each for relatively small amounts it will have an impact. Contrary to popular assumptions tax agencies do not have unlimited funds and their mandate is to raise money for the state not spend it. If the paperwork burden gets bad enough where there is no significant return in taxes collected, they will change the rules to something more sensible where there is a threshold below which transactions are not reportable as is the case with foreign currency.

By the way I live in Canada and the CRA is doing a similar thing. They will learn just give them some time. It is interesting to see some tax agencies in Europe backtrack on VAT and BTC. The UK comes to mind here. In the meantime I am for tracking every satoshi and do not forget to claim those BTC network fees.  Wink



It's no different then Schedule D for stock buys/sales.

There's people who submit Schedule D forms THOUSANDS of pages long. Nobody actually looks at the individual lines unless they suspect something's wrong with it.

I've personally submitted a schedule D form 10+ pages long. It was auto generated by my broker. The IRS doesn't look at each line, they only look at the total (which I'm responsible for calculating).
3  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: I have exactly 0.0000 btc on: May 03, 2014, 05:35:39 AM
Scam people for it.

4  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: GOLD can now be made in laboratories and what it means for bitcoins on: May 03, 2014, 05:34:36 AM
Oh yeah, I got distracted by the horrible butchering of physical, and chemical, laws here, so I didn't even post what I wanted to.  Gold is not going to be devalued by being created, because we are not going to produce gold in significant quantities at any point in the foreseeable future.

However, gold will likely be devalued by a huge influx of supply anyway.  This supply will come from asteroids.  Google, James Cameron, and many other billionaires\100+ millionaires, have been investing in companies that are developing the technology, and making plans, to capture, and mine, asteroids.

For example, 241 Germania is an asteroid that contains enough resources (in the form of various metals, minerals, water, etc.) that it could be worth $50-100 TRILLION if fully mined.  But, that is a very large asteroid, and very far away, so probably not one anyone will mess with anytime soon.  Instead, they would likely go for small asteroids that are very near us.  Many of those have $50-100 Billion worth of platinum and gold.

Here's the thing. The cost of mining an asteroid is going to be extremely expensive. So it's not like they found a way to get gold for $50 an oz. If it costs $1000 / oz to mine the gold, it'll still be profitable to mine it and sell it at current market prices, but it's not like they're going to be dumping it on the market super cheap.
5  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: GOLD can now be made in laboratories and what it means for bitcoins on: May 02, 2014, 06:12:36 PM
I thought that they were able to produce gold for 10+ years already, just that the price to produce is significantly more expensive than mining it.

Making gold is of trivial difficulty.

We have particle accelerators that have made much more difficult elements then gold.

The problem is it'll probably cost you 10K in electricity alone to make 1 atom of gold.


and the odds are it will be radioactive.

You can make stable gold isotopes as well.

Again -- it's just extremely expensive to do so.
6  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: GOLD can now be made in laboratories and what it means for bitcoins on: May 02, 2014, 03:19:03 AM
Btw, according to wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthesis_of_precious_metals (at the bottom of the page)

The first gold synthesis (granted, it was a radioactive isotope) was in 1924.

I dunno when the first stable isotope synthesis was, but it was probably a long time ago and nothing new.

Extracting gold from seawater is also very real.

But none of those methods are cost effective.

It's kind of like buying the computing power to brute force a bitcoin private key. It's possible, but not worth it.
7  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: GOLD can now be made in laboratories and what it means for bitcoins on: May 02, 2014, 03:06:45 AM
I thought that they were able to produce gold for 10+ years already, just that the price to produce is significantly more expensive than mining it.

Making gold is of trivial difficulty.

We have particle accelerators that have made much more difficult elements then gold.

The problem is it'll probably cost you 10K in electricity alone to make 1 atom of gold.
8  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: The size of the blockchain... on: May 02, 2014, 02:00:30 AM
Quote
bitcoin QT can sometimes use upwards of 1 GB of RAM.

With some custom settings to limit what gets held in memory, you could get this down to less than 10MB, but it would require a fair bit of work.
Whatever work is done must not slow down the speed at which the node works. You would be doing the network a disservice if your node took a long time to validate and relay messages and blocks because of your low memory footprint and under-powered CPU configuration.

I think people underestimate how powerful low-cost DSPs have become.  For example, C. Gouvea was able to verify secp256k1 ECDSA signatures in 700 ms using an ultra-lower power 16-bit microcontroller running at a only 8 MHz (and available as in a tiny 3 x 3 mm package size).  Even very cheap ARM-core processors ($2 - $4) will typically run at ~150 MHz (and with 32-bit registers).  So let's say signature verification for each received TX takes no more than 20 ms, at which point you can relay the transaction to your other peers.  This seems perfectly acceptable to me.  

The only other issue I can think of is RAM, but I don't see why you can't store the unspent outputs in the SD card itself (new SD cards permit reads in excess of 30 MB/s so I think the time it takes to cross check the outputs in a TX with the blockchain unspent outputs stored in flash will be short compared to the signature verification times [20 ms]).  It seems you just need sufficient RAM to pool the unconfirmed transactions (and some overhead to accept new blocks, etc), so upon first glance the 6x8mm 64 MB IC for $1.50 seems sufficient for this purpose.  

I think such a bitcoin node would be useful if it could be made only a few cm in dimensions, cost less than $10-$15 excluding the SD card, and be trivial to set-up.  

  



I think write endurance would be an issue if you're trying to use an SD card as RAM.
9  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: The size of the blockchain... on: May 01, 2014, 11:17:38 PM
Quote
does anyone have bitcoind running on an ARM processor?

People have got it running on raspberry pis.

Thanks.  I do know about the raspberry pis, but I'm thinking even smaller: a tiny little custom board with only the bare minimum hardware required to run bitcoind.  Perhaps the ARM processor could still run linux, or perhaps in the future we could write a version of bitcoind that implemented its own simple OS (as is commonly done for DSP projects).  


Quote
The amount of memory (RAM) you require is the main problem.

I suppose you need enough RAM to pool the unconfirmed transactions, right?  A 64 MB chip could hold around 100,000 TXs.   Here's a 64 MB SDRAM chip that is only 6mm x 8mm in size and costs about $1.50: http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/AS4C4M16S-6BIN/1450-1077-ND/4531924

bitcoin QT can sometimes use upwards of 1 GB of RAM.
10  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: The size of the blockchain... on: May 01, 2014, 10:57:54 PM
Quote
does anyone have bitcoind running on an ARM processor?

People have got it running on raspberry pis. The amount of memory (RAM) you require is the main problem.

Yeah, storing the data is no prob. You can't use it without a lot of RAM though.
11  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: My credit card is frozen--good opportunity on: May 01, 2014, 10:17:26 PM
I went to place a small order from DigiKey but I got the error "can't process your order--please contact your bank."  This seems to happen several times a year and requires me to either wait till the problem disappears on its own, or sit on hold for 30 min to resolve.  Last time Visa froze my card because I ordered "$1500 of merchandise from an online store categorized as 'women's apparel.'"  When I called to resolve the issue they said that "since I was not a woman" the transaction was flagged as suspicious.  Visa, do you not realize that men buy things for women?

Eventually, we will be able to purchase on-line from several merchants without the "help" of third-parties.  But in the meantime, please someone create a reliable bitcoin-to-credit-card gateway that also manages my shipping addresses.  I would pay for this service just out of spite for Visa. 

(My apologies for the rant!)



Seems like you should get in on this: https://xapo.com/in/campaign/debit/

That's not going to solve any problems of debit cards.

Presumably if it's a debit card, they need to offer fraud protection and chargebacks as well.

If it's a debit card it's going to be processed through visa or mastercard.
12  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: My credit card is frozen--good opportunity on: May 01, 2014, 08:26:04 PM
lol, I agree that visa's a pain in the ass sometimes, but I never have this problem with amex.

I made an 8K charge on my amex card without so much as a phone call questioning it.
13  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: please help me transfer my mined bitcoin into my wallet on: May 01, 2014, 04:36:05 AM
It's gone.
14  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: If we start including bitcoin miners in houses as amenities. on: April 30, 2014, 08:32:33 PM
Heater = simple resistor with some protection for people don't get toasted. Super simple and cheap to produce.
Mining ring = computers with lots of hard to produce, failure prone and expensive components, like gpus and ASICs.  

So you agree with me.  If electrical "mining" heaters can't be made cheap, reliable and easy enough, then there would be no economic advantage to using one in place of a simple electric heater so then they won't be used. 


Quote
I think only people already prone to buy miners would consider using then also as heaters

If the mining-heaters can be made cheap, reliable and simple such that using them saves money, then of course people would install them.  Do you think the average person knows how a heat pump works?

It all comes down to what is most cost effective.

I have no interest in hand-waving debates about "what will be most cost effective in various scenarios at some distant point in the future" as we'll both likely be wrong.  

You're high if you think computer chips that can process something can ever be made as cheap (or anywhere close to as cheap) as a bunch of resistors made to just to burn electricity.
15  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: If we start including bitcoin miners in houses as amenities. on: April 30, 2014, 03:57:21 AM
Miners use no more electricity than an electric heater.  100% of the electrical energy "used" by the miner is converted to thermal energy (heat).  Of course in most places there are more cost effective methods of heating a house such as natural gas furnace, propane, or heat pump.

Yeah, except the wiring used in an electric heater are a hell of a lot cheaper then making a bunch of ASIC chips.
16  Economy / Service Discussion / Looks like all the dumbasses who have CEX.io GHs are going to be holding the bag on: April 30, 2014, 03:55:51 AM
Looks like the price at cex.io crashed.

And the maintenance fees are ridiculous now.

Maintenance of 100 GH = $26 / month.

Revenue of 100 GH at current exchange rate (443) and current difficulty = just $83 / month.

In a few more months those GH won't be profitable at all.
17  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: Bitcoin Mixing Services on: April 29, 2014, 05:37:58 AM
i think that this type of thing is one of the reasons why the us shouldnt be able to tax bitocin theres always oging to be able to launder money and for the time being they dont have an real way of doing so

You know even money made illegally (say, drug dealing) is taxable right?

Ever hear of al capone?
18  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: Sunlot is buying Mt. Gox, hopes to make customers whole! on: April 29, 2014, 05:17:09 AM
It only compensates people from US / Canada.
The majority of the MtGox customers were foreigners (including me).
These foreign customers are not included in this Class Action

Well that's what matters.

Nobody really cares about ppl from 3rd world countries.
19  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: Bitcoin Mixing Services on: April 29, 2014, 03:29:14 AM
I figured out a way to mix coins and not have to pay for the service (other then transaction fees).

(0 taint too)
20  Economy / Trading Discussion / Re: where can i get $2 worth of btc via paypal? on: April 28, 2014, 02:08:43 AM
you can use http://www.bitcoininsanity.com/ for this ...

I looked at the site, and it's not clear how they avoid being ripped off with charge-backs.
Any idea how they actually control/avoid fraud?


They're limiting people to like 0.046 BTC / day for $25, which is actually like $20 worth of BTC..

So basically they're counting on the fact that there's not many ppl who are going to do chargeback fraud to make 20 bucks.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!