I brought up this old thread for a reason.... everyone wanted modest inflation... well at the price of BTC today (8 dollars) you got it... a ton of it. Inflation causes price decreases Price decrease != inflation |
|
|
|
The worst thing about this is that early adopters are losing Bitcoins they would probably invest back into the Bitcoin economy/infrastructure, losing them to people who will rather just sell them for fiat money.
On the other hand... they're most likely selling them to a large number of new, interested people, eroding the complaint against early adopters controlling an inordinate number of Bitcoins... Silver lining? |
|
|
|
gold is not a currency because it is not easily divisible.
Prior to computer networking, how did one easily divide a $100 bill? By exchanging it for smaller denominations? |
|
|
|
This won't work out if you got eventually an orphan block first confirmed transaction. The block may be marked ORPHAN if integrity of the network would be broken for some time, so this transaction will be confirmed in other chain a lot of blocks later or may be even lost(?). That's why it's recommended to wait untiil 100 confirmations. I suppose it's quite easy to separate bitcoin clients and break network for hours or days.
I think you're confusing a couple of different things. The network enforces (I think?) 120 confirmations for generated coins, because in the event of a network split, coins generated and then spent during the split are the most problematic. For regular transactions, the client enforces a wait of 6 confirmations, but that is merely a client rule. |
|
|
|
The two scenarios are EXACTLY THE SAME.
In terms of purchasing power of the money holder, yes. In term of inflation (the unit of value for calculations and contracts), no. In terms of interest rates, no. The economic decision making is different. I think they are correct that the two scenarios are effectively equal. With inflation, the purchasing power of all money holders decreases. With demurrage, the purchasing power of all money holders decreases. Total money supply = 2X, purchasing power = X vs. total money supply = X, purchasing power = X/2. They are mathematically equivalent. In both cases the winners are miners, the losers are savers. |
|
|
|
Or they could just buy up cheap cpins during the attack. Suspend the attac. Sell the coins once prices recover. Go back to step 1.
Why do you assume prices will fall during an attack on the block chain? |
|
|
|
The irony of a decentralized currency forum complaining about the ethos of free-market capitalism astounds me.
Then you don't understand the meaning of free market. The complaining is their avenue of recourse. Notice they are not threatening him with violence explicitly or through the law. |
|
|
|
Ok, so you can't provide any support for this statement? Mugging and starving are the choices presented in a monetary system.
A monetary system perpetuates structural violence, which is more far reaching and more devastating than physical violence. This discussion is outside of the thread topic, however. Anyone can make assertions, but nothing you've said backs this up. If you're talking about fiat money, sure, states are violent. Feel free to make another thread to prove money causes violence and link it here. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Ok, so you can't provide any support for this statement? Mugging and starving are the choices presented in a monetary system.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin is fundamentally flawed and it seems to me that someone so fucking clever should have come up with a way to base the block difficulty on some standard of economic activity and not the absolutely retarded metric of how many people are chomping at the bit for their own blocks. Hahaha. some standard of economic activity absolutely retarded metric of how many people are chomping at the bit for their own blocks Whoosh. That's the sound of you missing the point. |
|
|
|
Still available at 15BTC!
I'm interested. I've got a E1500 series that could use some work... would that be eligible for trade-in?  |
|
|
|
Well Atlas, where i come from people sell facebook fan pages and alikes like hot cakes and i don't see anything wrong with that. People must be rewarded, if not for more, at least for the time dedicated to it. I guess some people prefer those guys who try to trademark Bitcoin, never contributing a single bit to it  To all the nay sayers: The man worked for it. Must he starve, instead of trying to capitalize on his time? Or must he mug an old lady?  Mugging and starving are the choices presented in a monetary system. Prove it. |
|
|
|
|
Just want to say that I don't think what you tried to do was morally wrong. Perhaps the way you went about it was not the most honest, but it seems to me that you homesteaded r/Bitcoin and therefore should be able to do with it as you wish (within the reddit terms of use, of course).
|
|
|
|
Atlas, You know as well as I do that your life is yours...
But there are better ways to deal with your problems than quitting.
Haters gonna hate. Fuck 'em.
It's not the haters. I just don't feel like playing anymore. I haven't felt like playing more and more often. It's getting hard. I think I can keep going. I can presume I will feel like living soon. I hope. If you're getting to the point where you're considering suicide, at least order some LSD, mushrooms, or MDMA from the Silk Road and have a few good trips first. Worst case scenario, it provides no additional insight and you kill yourself with a few more experiences under your belt. Best case scenario, you gain a new perspective on life and find a reason to live. To answer your question, no I do not think it is morally wrong, but from an outside perspective it is stupid and wasteful. It's your life to live or end, but ending it will hurt those that care about you. |
|
|
|
The way the prices have fluctuated in light of the last 5 days, I see this as an "Intraday" trading market, trading around the big low for the week, and then selling at the end of the rally a day or two later, IHMO.
Thoughts on this?
SJ
I couldn't agree more. The volatility lately has made it a day trader heaven. Tuesdays intra-day low is the line in the sand for now, but even if it breaks $10 is not far from it which holds as a psychological support level. IMO Thanks for validating. I had it in my mind originally that I would be watching and trading hour to hour with this stuff. But the chart data patterns point to more profitable ventures with more long-term trades throughout the week, i.e getting in on the weekly low, then selling for profit that day or the next... and then repeat. Will be interesting to see what patterns emerge for the Weekend and Next Week. SJ Volatility -> profit -> stability |
|
|
|
DELETE THAT S*** ASAP
From where I stand, despite you look a good coder, you're RETARDED!
You just posted MASM32 code for a virus, do you at least have a clue on what you're doing?! Or trolling is more important to you?!
So what? It's already out there, anybody who wants to can find it easily. It's not like your browser's going to execute it or something.  I hope nobody's listening to you for security obscurity advice. |
|
|
|
Your number is for instantaneous profitability. That may apply if you are selling all mined coins immediately and saving in other currency. However, if you expect in the longer run bitcoin may appreciate, then it can be worth it to accumulate as many as you can now in anticipation for that day, even if you have to pay by operating at an instantaneous loss in the mean time. We've been over this many times. If you keep them it's speculation, and the potential gain should be attributed to this, not the mining. Also, if you are operating at a loss you should stop mining and buy coins instead. Not necessarily. Hardware is a one time cost. It may be more beneficial to run it even when the sale of coins doesn't pay for electricity and upkeep, just to keep the hardware generating. Obviously this is less attractive if you expect the value of bitcoins to fall instead of climb. |
|
|
|
Didn't the ppl who lost the job pay taxes? Why they should pay taxes if the government does not help them when they need it? They shouldn't. Nobody should pay taxes. Anything worth paying for doesn't need to be funded involuntarily. so everybody should build their own roads and hospitals? Does everybody built their own supermarkets and homes? |
|
|
|
I don't really see the problem. If you lost your job and couldn't pay your mortgage, I'm sure you wouldn't be whining about this decision.
This is just taxpayer money tunneled to the banks. Exactly. Without this, the banks would have to fight to get their money back, by proving that they own the home loan and have standing to foreclose. Now, all they have to do is sit back and collect the free taxpayer money. Such is the nature of the state. |
|
|
|
I went to a private college, thanks. You're probably the product of public (or no) education, hence why think it's valid to compare these countries while ignoring what other forces and historical events got them to where they are now.
And here we have again one of AyeYo numerous handwavings, with his typical repressed hostility. Citizens can remain irrational far longer than states can remain solvent? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
