I haven't seen much news on the space-heater and water-heater front lately, but water heaters would be "free" too once "we all have one anyway"...  -MarkM- I can't tell if you are mocking me for real or for fun. It's like cow shit man. The price is really low because a bunch of people already have cows for other reasons. It would be dumb to think that the price of cow shit needs to take into account all the expenses associated with cows. Only the marginal costs count and we were at a low margin in the CPU mining world. |
|
|
|
|
I don't know why he discounts the cost of hardware, that seems at least as important. Maybe he was imagining only CPU mining and considered them "free" since we all have them anyway.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoins are tied to electronics aren't they? You are stuck needing a smartphone to be able to spend your coins out in the world, right?
Wrong.
I make the following observation because it struck me as being a powerful demonstration of what makes bitcoin so good.
Imagine you funnel all your bitcoins to one master address. Your entire wealth is now represented by the private key associated with that address.
With a little bit of effort one could memorise that key. I know it's a long number, but humans regularly accomplish far more impressive feats of memory. The general consensus is that it does not require special intelligence, nor special memory skills. All humans have excellent memory's if they just choose work at it. Once you have memorised that key, it can be deleted from your wallet.
That then is the power of bitcoin: all your wealth can, in principle, be stored in your head. There is no more secure location. I'm not suggesting that we all do this, it would not be practical -- what is important is that it is possible.
Perhaps everyone else has already realised this; if so, my apologies for wasting your time.
For a variety of reasons, it will be much more practical to encrypt your wallet.dat file and memorize the password. This still requires new-fangled electro-technology to be hauled around with you. Here's the plan: All funds to one address, tattoo most of the private key down your arm, memorize the rest. Bam, money on your skin, money in your head. |
|
|
|
If you have run several businesses with millions of dollars in revenue, you should have the $70,000 USD capital to buy the 10,000 BTC you claim you require.
Smells super fishy to me.
Millions in revenue doesn't mean millions in the bank =P It's not smart business to spend $70,000 on BTC when I'm sure we can find someone who could swim in his BTC pile like Scrooge McDuck. It's not smart business to be so sure. |
|
|
|
What is happening is that BTC is breaking away from the mainstream and being supported by a sub-group. This sub-group will eventually be replaced by yet another sub-group, and on and on until only a relative small group of people use it.
Come on. Bitcoin used to be mainstream? This is just silly. why its "just" silly ? does it less "silly" than other nowadays money ? Are you seriously claiming that bitcoin WAS mainstream and now is less used? I think you are confused from the language. |
|
|
|
I'll respond to two chunks at random.
How can you solve this problem. If you except that you need a robot to use robot money, then why don't we play with the model a little.
The coin isn't really the model, it's the box, isn't it. Where the coins are all hashed together? So we have a box full of BTC and some not so bright person come along and you offer them some. All they have to do is give you a credit card and you will sell the BTC to them. A lot easier than making BTC, buy them?
Are you worried about your phone dieing while your out and not being able to spend coins? Theoretically all you need is the private key, so you should eventually be able to spend off of a machine in store with just your data, no power.
This is exactly the way you sell debt, or securites. No taker, no value. SO the only think that makes BTC attractive is that it is buzz for the moment. That is not value, and with BTC it turns out to be a lot of work for nothing. No value. Nothing. Hint: zero.
There is no value anywhere outside of what people value. Do you think you have an example of something with value that no person values? |
|
|
|
Anyway the trade page is way too long, listing shouldn't be on the wiki (this is no longer information, but just promotion)
Is this a suggestion to kill the trade page altogether? |
|
|
|
"Vires in Numeris" = "Strength in Numbers" is appealing the most to me. It is simple and works on more than one level at the same time.
I agree. I like "Liberty starts with free money" too, but this one is shorter and indeed has multiple meanings "Free money" has a good and bad meaning imo. "Strength in numbers" is awesome. |
|
|
|
Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't those people protesting in Spain protesting against government austerity measures? Because if I'm correct and they are first of all I have zero sympathy for them and 2nd of all I wouldn't want Bitcoin to get associated with socialists in anyway shape or form.
I used to think this too. I know these people don't have it all figured out, but consider this. If I come to you and promise to take care of your needs if you give me your schools, your roads, your money, and then make you buy an expensive license for everything more complicated than walking alone and your needs aren't met and you aren't making a move to give me back all those things and leave me alone then I'm going to make demands on you. These aren't people clamoring for the creation of a government (though maybe they have and would again I don't know) they are demanding something that probably doesn't total even to all government buildings and land let alone all past squandered wealth. Doesn't seem like the venue to spread bitcoin. It's kind of a thinking thing. |
|
|
|
|
His secret weapon should be suggesting how people could agree on a way to work together and then leaving them to do as they please.
|
|
|
|
If processing old transactions becomes expensive, then miners will start charging transaction fees to include them in their blocks.
Speculating about exactly HOW the miners will charge (will they subscribe to an 'old transaction service' or somehow contact the old-transaction-spender for the merkle branch of the old transaction?) is a waste of time, in my humble opinion.
I don't disagree. I'm trying to create a standard for this that miners can turn to, and in this way also allow capital accumulators to plan out their best course of action before this point arises. If my proposal, or something similar, is generally accepted by the miners as workable now, then current users will already begin to alter their behavior in a manner that limits their own costs in the future. I think you are trying to fix something that isn't broken and have no way of knowing if it is going to be broken or not. A lot of assumption. There is a danger here. Unintended consequences. This is why we have the saying, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". You might end up doing more harm than good. I don't know for certain, this is true. But I do know economics. I know incentives. And I know praxeology. The ultimate test of any science is the ability to make repeatable predictions about the future, otherwise the theory is flawed. Economics has many theories, but in my opinion, Austrian Economic Theory is more accurate at ongoing predictions than any other theory. And the reason for this is that Austrian Economic Theory is based upon the concept of the rational economic actor, and the study of how changes in the economic environment effects those rational economic actors and their behavior. I look at the system as it is, and I see a small oversight in the picture. I see an "externality" to use the lexicon of the modern world. It probably will never be a problem. I've admitted this. And as such I have made a proposal that would only affect the system if it were ever to become a problem. That's why I suggested an 'alternative minimum' miners' choice type fee, and not a hard rule. If it's in place, and never really needed, it would cause no harm. If in the future without any significant block reward, if it turns out that this really is a concern; those miners would have the choice of enforcing this known rule in order to establish a price floor. I intentionally thought it out in order to limit the possibility of unintended consequences, another reason to have it as a miners' choice rule and not a hard|validity type rule. If it were to have some unintended consequence show up, the miners' could simply stop honoring the rule, announcing their intent to do so. Users won't object to the removal of a counter-productive fee, but they are likely to resist the imposition of new fees. Sounds right to me. |
|
|
|
Quick updates, and a question:
1) I'm still trying to squash a Mt. Gox exchange bug (critical for launch), after that, I think I will ease us into open beta. Hopefully today; more updates in this thread.
2) I have slotted 1 contract = 1 BTC. Most options markets are 1 contract = 100 of the underlying. Does anyone have a strong opinion on this? Since we clear automatically, I'm not worried about logistics. I am guessing that smaller units per contract increases liquidity, but I'm not really sure. It wouldn't be the end of the world to rebase later, but it would be enough of a pain that I'm curious what people think. Opinions welcome.
Thanks guys! I'm excited!
I like 1-1. |
|
|
|
Is anyone else concerned about Satoshi (or whomever was in the original group) having control of almost 20% of the btc economy? This isn't the perfect place to post this question, but it was something that got me thinking. The original group is estimated to have about 20% of the current currency in circulation. For me this raises many questions about what could happen with so much power in such a anonymous (read NOT transparent) group.
Do we know he's got that much? There isn't a single other person I'd rather have that much, anyway. |
|
|
|
This is how markets work. Nothing sinister.
Actually, in stock markets, you CAN get fined for the behavior that I described in my first post. Such market manipulation is regulated. Not really relevant. Just because one market is regulated in a certain way, it does not follow that all other markets should be regulated the same way. Also, the Bitcoin market is extremely risky. It should go without saying: Be Effing Careful. My point was not to encourage regulation - that was your addition, I think. My point was along the lines of your last sentence. If you are making buy decisions by looking at the buy order log, keep in mind that those buy orders could be an attempt to fool you, and can be cancelled at any time. They could be an attempt to signal to the masses that there is a demand that really isn't there (because the orders could be cancelled). They could be an attempt to show support, so that a sell order can get a maximum value. Be Effing Careful. You will miss the forest for the trees.
You're right there. My price target on Bitcoins is $147 per BTC. So if I buy it for $6 or $7, who cares about a buck! Hey, I'm up to 5.19 BTC just from people's generosity. Once I get 1000 BTC, I'll explain my $147/BTC math, which is sure to drive the price up.  Yeah, I move markets, haha. I'm trying to buy some Bitcoins, but it's still very hard! If you buy at $6 instead of $7 you'll have ~16% more coins. Which is meaningful at $147000. |
|
|
|
|
When do you imagine that the price changes? After Richee McGee has sold all he wants at the high price or as he is selling?
The price always moves against you. More if you do large, less if you do small. There is no profit here, only paying more or getting less as you go. When you try to go the other way afterwards, same thing happens.
|
|
|
|
No im sad that your idea had nothing similair to mine except the word scratch card xD
Oh, well my main idea was just email gambling games. The other stuff is all just variations that will maybe work with different models, whatever. I meant people buy a scratch card for like 0.1 - 0.4 BTC then if they win they get BTC's back Yeah, me too. Maybe I should go review what I wrote The "card wins for sure" was just a possible option to give if you wanted to guarantee to brighten someone's day. |
|
|
|
Only if I was a large investor.  It's only those with huge financial resources (like $trillions) that can control the markets like that. Ah, right. Everything is different for the rich, none of my explanations or examples apply to them. I think the rich must be level 80 wizards or something. The key is the time delay. Small investors don't know when the price will go up or down. The mega large investors on the other hand can MAKE the price go up and down, and are able to sell at a high price BEFORE the price drops as a consequence of selling a huge amount of the commodity. The same thing when they buy huge amounts where the increase of the price happens with a certain time delay. Christ, I just told you that I made the price go down by .0025. There was no profit opportunity. Small players make the price go down by small amounts, and there is no small profit made thereby. Big players make it go down by big amounts, and there is no big profit made thereby. |
|
|
|
No im sad that your idea had nothing similair to mine except the word scratch card xD
Oh, well my main idea was just email gambling games. The other stuff is all just variations that will maybe work with different models, whatever. |
|
|
|
Ok, I get it now. This post was actually a copy-paste of this post. So yeah, probably spam. Ah, clever robots. These things are going to eat us if we aren't careful. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
