Female, 80+ 4 (4.3%)
seems legit Unfortunately, there's no statistically accurate way of removing this inaccuracy. The only thing I can suggest is to ignore categories under 5% for now. |
|
|
|
|
We have our first voter who has not reached the age of ten yet. Together with the middle school, high school, and university students in the teens, Bitcoin is turning out to be a very young community.
|
|
|
|
skateboards, oranges No. Once you get down to a single skateboard (or orange), you really can't divide it any further and still have it be useful as a skateboard (or orange). Fair point. But my point still stands; Bitcoin as we know it is finite. A future version that divides it further is a blockchain fork and is not Bitcoin as we know it today. . . . the current precision seems like a design flaw . . . It seems that in the initial design it would have made more sense to have 11 decimal places. Then the maximum output in a transaction would be 92,233,720.36854775807 (92 million) . . . I've lobbied for the creation of three more decimal places in the past (as it would fit into the infrastructure), however, it was rejected on the premise that 2.1 quadrillion units is sufficient for the next year or so. Yeah, I can see why such a change in the current design would be considered low priority, I just can't understand why 8 decimal places instead of 11 were chosen in the initial design. Seems like a rather rookie mistake. 8 was probably chosen because nobody really cared about it back then. Bitcoin was supposedly designed with the average CPU miner mining 50 BTC a day in mind. |
|
|
|
GLBSE seems to be down at the moment.  |
|
|
|
 We've passed 2500, which is certainly an important milestone. That was 1/8400 (one eight thousand four hundredth) of the way, around 0.0119% of the way. At the rate this thread has been going, we would reach 21000000 in less than 3000 years. Amazing progress! So far: 2500: Counted5000: Not counted
...
21000000: Not counted |
|
|
|
skateboards, oranges No. Once you get down to a single skateboard (or orange), you really can't divide it any further and still have it be useful as a skateboard (or orange). Fair point. But my point still stands; Bitcoin as we know it is finite. A future version that divides it further is a blockchain fork and is not Bitcoin as we know it today. Interesting. I hadn't really looked into it, but the current precision seems like a design flaw. Bitcoin is designed such that it can never have more than a total of 21 million BTC, so even if someone somehow owned every BTC ever in existence and tried to create a single transaction to send all of it to another address, the transaction output wouldn't/couldn't ever exceed 21 million. Looking at the specs, the output is represented as int64_t. This would seem to imply that even if the value stored in signed, the maximum transaction output is 92,233,720,368.54775807 (92 billion) It seems that in the initial design it would have made more sense to have 11 decimal places. Then the maximum output in a transaction would be 92,233,720.36854775807 (92 million) This would still leave enough room for a single transaction that contains EVERY bitcoin ever in existence, but would provide an additional 3 decimal places for if/when deflation eventually drives the value of a bitcoin sufficiently high. I've lobbied for the creation of three more decimal places in the past (as it would fit into the infrastructure), however, it was rejected on the premise that 2.1 quadrillion units is sufficient for the next year or so. |
|
|
|
The Need for Cognition scale [64] is a measure of the extent to which people engage in and enjoy effortful cognitive activities. People with high need for cognition are more likely to form their attitudes by paying close attention to relevant arguments, whereas people with low need for cognition are more likely to rely on peripheral cues, such as how attractive or credible a speaker is. The measure was completed by 8,035 participants (4,242 men; 5,888 liberals, 760 conservatives, and 657 libertarians). http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0042366Note there are different samples for each measurement for some reason (cognitive reflection task = 9,721 participants). The authors also report a significant correlation between cognitive reflection score and need for cognition (r = .3, p <.001). Talk about sampling to a foregone conclusion... cutoff pearson's R at .001 for such large samples is like .15. Due to these silly errors in reporting methods and interpreting resutls, I would personally dismiss the paper as not worth studying or quoting further unless you are in the field. Although I would not classify the paper as a reliable source, I would not be surprised if the result is accurate. Libertarians, due to the ideology's requirements, may indeed have higher need for cognition than people who affiliate with other ideologies. |
|
|
|
Take a look at BitcoinTorrentz. They do not have as high a yield as some, but they have been around a while and are providing a nice service.
Other than that, you are right, there is very few GLBSE companies that deal in goods and services. I think if somebody with some business sense sets up a good business plan do some goods for bitcoin sales or services for bitcoin the GLBSE investors would jump at the opportunity to have something other than mining.
A couple to keep your eye on: CheaperInBitcoins was supposed to be a goods market but I have not heard anything for a while, Rugatu is a Q/A website with rewards in bitcoins, if it catches on the shares could be worth something, Bioethanol seems to be actually making a product but has just recently started and the profits so far have been small, Futurefund probably fails some of your criteria but I find the idea intriguing.
Hope that helped a bit.
Thanks for the suggestions! RUGATU and BITCOINTORRENTZ are excellent for my purposes (low-risk growth to deter further BTC value loss). CHEAPERINBITCOINS-STOCKS hasn't paid dividends in a while, so I'm suspicious. I still have to look into Bioethanol, as I'm unsure of the industry. Futurefund fails A flat for my purposes here, but if the owner is better-respected I would throw in a few coins as a charitable donation, if anything. |
|
|
|
GSDPT sounds interesting (growth low-risk company), but has no voting rights. It's the best I've seen so far. KRAKEN is too high-risk for me unless I have a hedge, and also has no voting rights. Could you explain why you think mining companies will fail? Miners should always, on average, be profitable. If mining becomes unprofitable for some, those with a low profit margin will be forced out, but those with a safer profit margin will be able to stay in and make profits.
I believe mining is in an extended bubble. Mining companies will become forced out by ASIC and low-energy mining. The majority of successful bitcoin companies are private and dont offer shares to the public they can buy.
A company that can raise money has the ability to be successful. Many large companies are public. A lot of mining companies have ASIC upgrade paths if you look closely. NASTY for instance should be one of the first to receive them from bfl. As for companies raising money most countries now have strict rules about public offerings which is unfortunate and means only high net worth individuals are eligible to invest. It sucks. If bitinstant listed on glbse for instance the SEC would massively fine them. Yeah, at the moment GLBSE is not as legally recognized as Bitcoin. However, I assume BTC-only services and goods providers (e.g. SatoshiDice) would be capable of listing on a stock exchange. I do not believe mining is ever going to offer the rewards they are now again. Competition is going up, subsidies are going down, and the entire industry is an arms race. |
|
|
|
skateboards, oranges No. Once you get down to a single skateboard (or orange), you really can't divide it any further and still have it be useful as a skateboard (or orange). Fair point. But my point still stands; Bitcoin as we know it is finite. A future version that divides it further is a blockchain fork and is not Bitcoin as we know it today. |
|
|
|
This is less about what you believe Bitcoin will be or is for, more about why you are here and what you want to use Bitcoin to achieve for yourself.
That is exactly why I am here and exactly what I wish Bitcoin to achieve. What it is, no more and no less. |
|
|
|
Could you explain why you think mining companies will fail? Miners should always, on average, be profitable. If mining becomes unprofitable for some, those with a low profit margin will be forced out, but those with a safer profit margin will be able to stay in and make profits.
I believe mining is in an extended bubble. Mining companies will become forced out by ASIC and low-energy mining. The majority of successful bitcoin companies are private and dont offer shares to the public they can buy.
A company that can raise money has the ability to be successful. Many large companies are public. |
|
|
|
Also, they're not infinitely divisible, but only down to a minimum of eight decimal places (0.00000001).
The current client only divides them down to eight decimal places, but there is nothing in the protocol that prevents them from being divided further. If the need should arise, they could be divided further by upgrading the client program. They are essentially infinitely divisible. The way you say it, anything is infinitely divisible. Stocks, fiat money, skateboards, or oranges. BTC as we know them are finite and indivisible. |
|
|
|
Looks like we're holding steady at ten. The last microbubble popped, all of the weak money has left and now we're back to our regularly scheduled program of stable prices.
The price has never, not in the history of Bitcoin, been steady at 15 US$. |
|
|
|
Due to BTC price fluctuations, I'm looking into value protection by investing into the Bitcoin goods and services market (which I feel has a lot of potential). Needless to say, a browse of top assets on the GLBSE has disappointed me. Most of the highest traded companies on GLBSE are either mining companies (which I believe will crash) or abandoned Pirate passthroughs. As such, I'm having difficulty finding the appropriate companies to invest in. Does anyone have any suggestions? What I wantNot all these conditions have to be met, but these are the general qualities of a stock I would like to own. - Secure futureA: Probably the most important. I dislike mining stocks and Pirate-like ponzi schemes because they can fail at any moment. If a stock fails this, I won't invest in it.
- VerifiedB: Having an owner that is known in the community and who has a name is very important. The more information, the better.
- VotingC: A voting stock is better than a non-voting one, because voting stocks treat the shareholders better.
- DividendD: A stock that pays no dividends or erratic dividends is not acceptable. However, a company should keep enough of its profits to reinvest or invest into marketing, improvements, or expansion.
- CommunicationE: If worse goes to worse, a company that leaves without a trace is unacceptable. The owners should maintain communication with its shareholders.
I realize this is picky, but in the USD stock market finding a stock with these traits is easy. I fail to understand why Bitcoin should be different. Rejected| Ticker | Reason | | BIB.PIRATE | A: Abandoned PPT | | BITBOND | A: Mining | | COGNITIVE | A: Mining | | FOO.PPPPT | A: Abandoned PPT | | FPGAMINING | A: Mining | | FUTUREFUND | A: High-risk | | GIGAMINING | A: Mining | | PPT.A | A: Abandoned PPT | | PPT.B | A: Abandoned PPT | | PPT.C | A: Abandoned PPT | | PPT.D | A: Abandoned PPT | | PPT.DIV | A: Abandoned PPT | | PPT.E | A: Abandoned PPT | | PUREMINING | A: Mining | | TYGRR.BOND-B | A: Abandoned PPT | | TYGRR.BOND-P | A: Abandoned PPT | | YABMC | A: Mining | | YARR | A: Abandoned PPT |
Unlikely| Ticker | Reason | | BDT | ABCE: Shady operator | | BIOETHANOL | Partially fails A, fails B | | KRAKEN | Fails C, does not strictly meet A | | MOVETO.FUND | Likely fails A due to investments in mining (not transparent) | | OBSI.HRPT | Partially fails A, fails B & C | | TEEK.B | Fails B & C. | | TYGRR.BOT | Fails B & C, has not paid dividends recently | | ZIP.A | Fails C and recently D & E |
To be considered| Ticker | Reason | | CHEAPERINBITCOINS-STOCKS | ABCDE: Recent troubles. | | GSDPT | ABC |
Accepted| Ticker | Reason | | BITCOINTORRENTZ | ABCDE: Secure, no competitors | | RUGATU | ABCDE |
KeyQ: Fails Q Q: Partially fails Q Q: Partially passes Q Q: Passes Q Q: No comment on Q [nothing]: Q is not relevant, not available, or there is insufficient information to determine a pass or fail |
|
|
|
|
I believe in Bitcoin because of what it is. A fair, novel, and decentralized monetary transfer system. No more and no less.
|
|
|
|
well about 90% of the chain were downloaded in two hours via p2p  Problem with p2p is that the client has to verify the blocks. This isn't done if it is injected manually. |
|
|
|
If you're betting that Pirate will pay out, you can invest in https://glbse.com/asset/view/TYGRR.BOND-PIt is a bond worth 1BTC stake in BS&T. Since Pirate has defaulted the bonds are not currently being bought back and are priced around 0.6-0.7BTC But if Pirate repays then the bond will return to 1 BTC. Just out of curiosity, if Pirate does default, will those bonds become not back by anything, and basically be like fiat currency? Worse than fiat currency, because they are backed by entirely nothing (not even the force of the government) and run the risk of being delisted, effectively removing its value as a store of value. Imagine money that not only nobody wants, but may also disappear whenever. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
