Pay fixed amount to a miner who found last block to bootstrap the network, later on it could be replaced with transaction fees.
This has been discussed on this and other forums under the name of "licensed mining". Basically only those who obtain a mining license can mine. Their mining license is their share of a global partnership that does money transfer or other commerce. Also, it doesn't have to be centralized. The mining licenses would allow for global voting, so if one (or some) members of the partnership get seized by a local government the global partnership continues to operate under the simple majority of votes. |
|
|
|
|
I'm sorry I will not be able to provide the links, but there is a nice account available for the very similar situation.
When BMW was looking for a site to locate a factory in the USA they sent a bunch of jet-set high-level execs to travel across the States in a beater van. After BMW made a decision for Spartanburg, SC and secured all the required land, rights of way, etc. they actually published a book (in German) about their adventure and how they avoided tipping off the opportunists and getting front-run.
I remember reading excerpts in some English-language publication for car enthusiasts. Maybe someone on this forum is sufficiently literate in German to find the original publication? Or maybe someone remembers where the excerpts were published in English?
|
|
|
|
Sure, if your system is built up like that. Usually keys matter if you have something irreversible associated to them.
In usual PKI deployments the association is done by a CA and underlying keys can change without a problem.
I apologise for the awkward wording of my question. Lets forget the Bitcoin for the moment, just look back into the past for the PKI systems that already exist, are deployed and in use. 1) Is/was there any system where the cryptographic keys carried any value higher than the cost of inconvenience to replace them? 2) Are/were there any smartcards/cryptodevices that provide internal error detection and correction and use it to signal impending failure instead of simply zeroizing the key material and self-destructing? In case you wonder: those are real questions, not the rhetorical ones. I don't know the answer. Years ago I've seen brochures (in German) of some vendor offering the system consisting of a safe, a stripped-down laptop and an anti-personnel mine hooked up to the glass lockout plate inside the safe. The only communication with the laptop was through the serial port. But this was a really expensive product. |
|
|
|
I've met Roman on a few occasions, nice guy.
He lives in New York, as do I.
Many people here met him as well.
Oh, I don't accept money orders either.
-Charlie
I quoted for posterity. I bolded and underlined the part that conforms to the "made a mistake and told the truth" maxim. |
|
|
|
Given prior experience with the field, I would suggest that this can be implemented in a month or two, and would give a real physical wallet, with comparable security to traditional chip cards (without the bad terminal<->card protocol in EMV  ). Given your prior experience I have one question: is anyone storing irreplaceable data on the smartcards? Thus far in my limited experience all practical cryptosystems relied on the fact that in case of smartcard/device failure the custody chain can provide replacement of the key material at a cost of inconvenience. Is there any practical application where lost/damaged keys have actual value lost together with them? |
|
|
|
$0.110 per GB-month of provisioned storage
8.000 GB-Mo
$0.88
$0.110 per 1 million I/O requests
1,119,146 IOs
$0.12
All up still cheaper than a micro, and FAR more performance. Your mileage may vary though, with spot instances we are never talking about a fixed cost.
Thanks for the info. So I was wrong about the I/O-intensity of bitcoind (and friends). I tended to avoid the EBS-based instances because in my case the storage charges were higher than processor charges. I only used ephemeral storage because there's no per-I/O-request charges. But then I couldn't use spot instances because the ephemeral storage is, well, ephemeral. But my workload must have been significantly different than yours. Thanks again for providing your data point. |
|
|
|
but a typical small instance will average out to costing about $0.01 an hour or $7.44 a month (assuming a 744 hour 31 day month),
Very interesting. Do your sums above include the EBS charges for the I/O operations? 'bitcoind' seems to me fairly I/O-intensive in relation to the fairly small amount of CPU work that it does. |
|
|
|
But for these Bitcoin exchanges in the USA accepting cash & money orders is really bad for business because they will get their bank accounts frozen. They might get away with it for a short period of time (3-24 months) but why take the risk? It is probably better to leave these cash customers to businesses like Bitinstant, BitPay, Payment Processors, In Person Exchangers, etc. I try to compare these exchanges to Discount Brokers in the USA but you will find no reputable Discount Broker that accepts cash, nor will they allow funds to move between accounts with different owner names (even if wife, mother, etc). Why? Because they don't want the business shut down or the staff to go to jail. Of course, there is a long list of Private Bankers who will accept a duffel bag full of cash but they don't operate within the law.  We may bitch and complain about all these banking rules in North America and Europe but when the shit hits the fan it's where we want our money. I think you are too pessimistic. With proper seggregated corporate setup the bitcoin exchanges could operate without any significant intererence. American Express is a great example how to set up a family of companies that will have no problems handling unclean money. I think a lot depends on the good cooperation with regulators. It isn't that difficult to employ non-confrontational people in the positions that need to interact with governments. Blackdawg had a good post about whom not to employ: Lynne Stewart. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=93038.msg1035118#msg1035118This is a classic example of confrontation for the sake of ego gratification and not for the business gain. I'm more concerned how long the Bitcoin itself (and the its core development team) can survive serving two masters. I see a quite clear split in the community of Bitcoin users into the pro-law and pro-anarchy camps. |
|
|
|
Scanner has an SDK and API for Windows which would probably reveal data like this if I felt like taking it on as a development project. I am simply using it as a keyboard wedge, which is nice because then it works just as well in Linux.
Post the links. Windows SDKs frequently have COM interface and then the whole development project would be a couple of lines of VB-script typed up in Notepad. Other scanners have a "enable debug mode" barcode printed in the documentation. Then all you have to do is scan that code after powering up and it will output detailed debug information after every press of the trigger. |
|
|
|
I regularly scan QR codes with a handheld laser scanner. This scanner uses a red laser and likely a monochrome CCD sensor.
Please carefully read the documentation of your scanner. It may be possible to get the BER (Bit Error Rate) after the scan. Almost every scanner has it stored somewhere, but the ways to get it are different for each of them. BER is the thing to watch for when really working with high-volume scanning. |
|
|
|
If it's such a monumental problem that you make it out to be, perhaps you should be the first to create an exchange that uses them? Actually, quick tip: don't bother, because you are the only person I have ever heard ask for such a thing, so I can't imagine a sustainable demand for it.
Yeah, I'm a capitalist. Currently the Bitcoin market is full of sheeple bleating to be shorn. There are young naive sheeple like ninjarobot, gambling-addicted sheeple like MemoryDealers, etc. I'll leave the sheeple-shearing to sheeple-herds. Zhoutong was an excellent one. I really admire the youthful moxie of the "boy plunger of Singapore". Somebody will soon step into his place. Sooner or later the people will start showing up on the Bitcoin market. Some of those people will be former sheeple; it is usually the quiet, lurking ones that grow out of the sheeplitude. With the change in demand the new providers will show up on the market. |
|
|
|
I don't see any problem with using MoneyGram via Bitinstant/ZipZap, other than a few fees, and it would seem to achieve what you are looking for, mostly, as far as I can tell.
Honestly, I'm not really sure why you have a bee in your bonnet in regards to postal money orders at all.
The difference between MoneyGram/WesternUnion and USPS is simple. With the first two if you have problem you have a commercial dispute under the civil law. With additional effort you could escalate it under per-state criminal law. With the USPS if you have problem you call USPS postal inspectors. They'll do the investigation and prosecute under the federal mail fraud statues. Basically the advantage for USPS money orders is that it is much easier and cheaper to start the legal proceedings in case of problems. |
|
|
|
I have no interest in exhaustively proving the point but I know for a fact Amazon, Apple,
I know for that both Amazon and Apple happily took both certified checks and money orders from the company I used to consult for. One has to know how to open a proper business account with them. Netflix doesn't take money orders because their business model is based on monthly subscription charges that people forget to cancel. What was that company that used to send you CDs and DVDs every month and then billed afterwards? Edit: I don't know anyone using Netflix, but for other similar companies I'm familiar with: when the credit card expires they'll gladly take a money order to settle the account. Edit: special addendum for Death And Taxes a.k.a. Tangible Cryptography: The Apple Online Store accepts a variety of payment methods. Click on a payment method below to find out more: Credit Cards or Debit Cards Cashier's Check or Money Order Wire Transfer Barclaycard Visa Cards Apple Business Lease (AFS Commercial Credit) Apple Gift Card Bill Me Later© (Consumer and Education Individuals) http://store.apple.com/us/help/paymentsI'm going to do a full quote, because he's know to delete/edit his messages. Can you name any reputable, well known organization in the USA that refuses to accept USPS money orders?
Try hard troll. How about name one that does: http://www.internetretailer.com/top500/list/I have no interest in exhaustively proving the point but I know for a fact Amazon, Apple, and Netflix don't take Postal Money orders and that is 3 of the top 10. I am pretty sure none of the top 20 or so accepts Postal Money Orders but I haven't (and don't care to) prove such a stupid point. I guess the worlds largest eCommerce company is "disreputable". Amazon Prime is just a scam so consumers won't notice they don't accept Money Orders. LOLZ. USPS money orders: they work like a holy water on a devil. |
|
|
|
Please point me to an exchange that does accept them. I know of none.
Well, you've seem to discovered on your own the problem with the current Bitcoin ecosystem in the USA. How about turning your question around: Can you name any reputable, well known organization in the USA that refuses to accept USPS money orders? Or maybe differnet way: Think of all the payees in the USA that accept the payments under $1k and sort them into two group: those that accept USPS money orders and those who don't. Now sort them into reputable and disreputable. Do you see the correlation and overlap? |
|
|
|
Um, no. Cross-examination is not a search for the truth or new information, it is a process by which the examining attorney forces a hostile witness to admit various facts that are damaging to the witness' credibility or their adversary's case. One of the basic principles of cross-examination is to never ask a question where you don't know the answer in advance - ideally, the "questions" should be phrased so that the witness can only make a short answer, with the questioner doing most of the talking.
If that's what you want to do, it would probably be more productive if you'd just say what it is you're trying to communicate.
And, yes, it is an important part of the US court system, but this is a message board, not a court.
Can you provide some sort of reference to the use of cross-examination in due diligence? I have been through the startup funding/acquisition grinder a few times and have never even heard someone propose cross-examination as a due diligence technique. In fact, the very idea of it seems counterintuitive, since the goal of a cross-examination is to force the witness to admit facts that the examiner knows in advance but wants to place in front of the finder of fact.
I will certainly agree that part of the "due diligence" process can involve asking pointed or difficult questions, but that's not cross-examination.
Thank you ofr your comment. It is very interesting to read a perspective of an attorney. But as you've observed this isn't the court and we don't have to obey the the codes of procedure. I purposely didn't say "Federal", because the concept of "cross-examination" is way broader than just Anglo-Saxon legal systems. I'm not going to say that you are "over-lawyered", but perhaps allow yourself to look at the cross-examination from the inquisitorial angle, not adversarial. In commercial due dilligence settings things are different. I've seen men coming to the meetings wearing hair-nets, counting on their fingers, intensely staring at the presenter's breasts, etc. Anything that works, because you don't do it for an audience, judge and jury; you do it for yourself. The idea is to discern whether the examinee is interested in running a business or is interested in ego gratification. Anyway, as you have seen the mention of USPS money orders worked like sprinkling of holy water on a devil. The 19-th century mail fraud statues are still potent. And because of the USPS postal inspectors it is easier for the small timer to get the ball rolling: no need to hire an attorney or deal with a local law enforcement. People can go directly on the federal level, where prosecution rates are much higher. |
|
|
|
Please do not provide misinformation about our supported deposit methods. We do NOT accept postal money orders. Please refrain from speaking on behalf of our exchange about our deposit options.
We encourage all our users to fully understand our deposit methods and give suggestions to others about how best to use our deposit methods, however we do not encourage the spread of false information about what our deposit methods are. Users are strongly encourage to verify with Bitfloor support and/or the Bitfloor website before assuming anything about how you can deposit funds into your account.
I just quote it for the future reference. The red flag is "We do NOT accept postal money orders." Anyone still willing to use BitFloor should spend some time reading the additional ACH/EFT disclosure that comes with their account. It is almost as long as the basic disclosure because you'll going to voluntarily relinquish some protections. |
|
|
|
|
Constructive protection suggestion:
When depositing USD on Bitfloor (or any other US-based exchange) try using USPS postal money orders. They give you additional protection under mail fraud statues and the USPS postal inspectors enforcement will talk to you even if the sums involved are small. When sending postal money orders do not use FedEx/UPS or other courier services. Use plain old registered mail with return receipt requested.
It is a very low tech but very good protection for those that plan on trading only small sums.
|
|
|
|
I am not sure what that means. But I can tell you that I got 0 letters. I have checking accounts in Chase, HSBC, ING. And overdraft was always by default on all of my accounts, I had to call them up and remove that feature from all of my accounts.
That was because when opening the account you consented to the credit check and pledged allegiance to their right of offset. The bank account opening forms in the USA are very long and very confusing. They however are legally significantly different than e.g. forms required when opening stockbrokerage accounts. |
|
|
|
What are you talking about? No seriously because none of it makes sense to me. Inadvertently disclosed? Unfamiliar with US banking? Loans? None of this makes any sense nor is it true. Anyone that has met with me in person (there are a number of Bitcoin users who have met me), talked to me on the phone, or otherwise done their research regarding Bitfloor can attest that I do indeed reside in the USA and that Bitfloor is as legitimate as it gets. If you look on the forums you will find nothing but satisfied users and a solid track record.
Your comments about loans and liquidity rebates really shows that you have no grasp of how trading or markets work. Please refrain from making baseless accusations against persons or businesses and claiming you are just "cross referencing" things.
Anyone who reads the linked technical discussion will show that I asked a very legitimate question and you proceeded to give non answers, troll, and otherwise insult anyone else related to that topic.
It is my opinion that you should be banned from these forums for such actions as they reflect poorly on not just your but the bitcoin community. I can't imagine how you respond to actual new users asking relevant questions just to be insulted. And then to go on an claim things about their residency or otherwise legitimacy without having done any research.
I'm sorry I offended you. Time will show like time had shown already. By the way, I used the phrase "cross-examination" not "cross-referencing". Thank you for everyone's attention. |
|
|
|
Overdrafts are not a required feature of a bank, and current regulation demands that all banks send a letter to customers to make them opt-in or out of overdraft protection. (OT: I have opted out)
Mr.Shtylman claimed that many banks in the USA routinely grant overdraft without being asked or informed about customer's identity and location. That actually happens very often, not in the USA, but in the countries where majority of banking deposits is done with the electronic transfers. I don't know what your worry is. It seems that you have something personal against him or his business, and are picking on extremely small points to try and demonstrate an imaginary flaw.
I know, at the beginning it always looks like nit-picking. I nitpicked Zhoutong on the day he announced Bitcoinica: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=42267.msg517560#msg517560I nitpicked Vince Torres withing couple of weeks of announcing trade-btc.com: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=46017.msg562031#msg562031 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
