All the people who cry bubble should just stay out.
The only people who can have "bubble fears" are those who are fully invested and think they need to sell some BTC. That is a perfectly reasonable economic decision. Any amount of hand-wringing by people without BTC is just background static.
Actually they are serving a useful purpose, vocalising the depth of the "wall of worry" that is out there  All those not invested and screaming bubble shut up as soon as they buy some, when those noises stop will be when we are getting close to the top of this particularly epic wall. |
|
|
|
Wonder who the IT sys admin guys for these banks are? How does they feel about plundering a vast portion of their countrymen by changing a few settings in a database?
An IT sys admin or programmer does not make the change, it is performed at the executive level via a GUI interface. Banks are instructed by the central bank that their systems must be able to support "xyz" feature, meaning that the functionality needed to freeze customers funds has long been programmed in to the banks systems. I wonder if you could go after them using one of these draconian dragnet "illegal use of a computer" type laws then? Someone punched those buttons that made thousands of people billions of dollars poorer, i.e. plundered them. Isn't that a criminal act in itself just hitting those buttons? |
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure if they do but probably Silk Road pays employees in BTC ... is that the kind of 'employer' you were thinking of?
|
|
|
|
As the post of Chairman appears to have been left open I'll appoint myself to that position.  My first point of business is to wind down all operations of the Bitcoin Central Bank, shut down the bank and resign. |
|
|
|
No need to back up the blockchain, there are already plenty of copies around the world. You should really make the note that only the blockchain copy on your machine has been validated by your own machine .... ... why are guys going to such lengths to obfuscate the dangers of not running your own full node I wonder? Not everyone is quite as paranoid  Maybe, but then it wouldn't be the all bells and whistles "trust no-one currency" would it? It must be paranoid by design ... oblivious to the human designer's subjective assessment of trust needed to function. |
|
|
|
No need to back up the blockchain, there are already plenty of copies around the world. You should really make the note that only the blockchain copy on your machine has been validated by your own machine .... ... why are guys going to such lengths to obfuscate the dangers of not running your own full node I wonder? |
|
|
|
oh my you people are bitching bit-ching already?
fixed. |
|
|
|
|
Best coin wins and to the vector go the spoils.
Different coins will win market share dependent on their money-ness properties, including network-effect (hype).
Also theoretically possible a better coin could beat out bitcoin by hijacking it's mining hash-power using merged mining but providing better monetary properties (inherent strong anonymity, totally free tx, etc)
|
|
|
|
It is basically a result of the period of the reward halving algorithm and the choice for the initial block reward of 50 btc.
that's like saying 'why are there twelve notes in the chromatic musical scale? it's the result of the space between the notes.' the number is arbitrary. it was one of several magic numbers satoshi chose, basically as educated guesses to favour bitcoin's adoption. i think he described them in exactly those terms once. you have reversed cause and effect to make a nonsensical non-point ... the choice for 50 per block implies it was arbitrary, the 21 million is a result of the halving algorithm applied to the arbitrary 50 btc per block choice. |
|
|
|
The interviewer asked "why 21 million?" and Tucker stumbled over that one somewhat I thought. It is basically a result of the period of the reward halving algorithm and the choice for the initial block reward of 50 btc. After 210,000 blocks 10.5 million btc were created. Now if we half the number being created every 210,000 blocks we will never quite reach exactly twice as many as were created in the first period ... i.e. 10.5 + 5.25 + 2.625 + 1.3125 + .... = 21 And the general formula for this sum is one of the most well-known summations from mathematics ... Zeno's dichotomy summationor  ... computer guys will enjoy the infinity of base-2 exponents in the denominator, another hat-tip from Satoshi Mechanistic =/ Teleological Bitcoin needs fewer mathematicians and more philosophers Actually no ... without math bitcoin would not work. Or know any good philosophers that can program? |
|
|
|
The real problem here is that nobody has ever witnessed an entire financial system convert into something else. Not just tangible coins to another round metal blank stamped with a different design - I'm talking complete conversion to something virtual.
We are witnessing the inevitable progression of a complete system change. That is why valuations won't make much sense to outside observers. Much like a person being pulled into a black hole, the physical laws of the surrounding space start to change in scary and unknown ways.
The entire financial sphere is being sucked in by the bitcoin singularity, with a huge event horizon that nobody in the current system can see past. By the time the last holdouts are reluctantly pulled in, we'll have jump-started a new economy, and be transacting in a currency that is beyond centralized control.
Taken the bitcoin red pill? (Pick up the Red phone and wait for the secret word `Hello`) Go down the rabbit hole that turns out be the wormhole ride into a black hole from which noone escapes and all others outside the event horizon can not make sense of what they see happening inside. |
|
|
|
Kind of disappointed this service announcement has been relegated to the "Gambling" section.  |
|
|
|
The interviewer asked "why 21 million?" and Tucker stumbled over that one somewhat I thought. It is basically a result of the period of the reward halving algorithm and the choice for the initial block reward of 50 btc. After 210,000 blocks 10.5 million btc were created. Now if we half the number being created every 210,000 blocks we will never quite reach exactly twice as many as were created in the first period ... i.e. 10.5 + 5.25 + 2.625 + 1.3125 + .... = 21 And the general formula for this sum is one of the most well-known summations from mathematics ... Zeno's dichotomy summationor ... computer guys will enjoy the infinity of base-2 exponents in the denominator, another hat-tip from Satoshi |
|
|
|
Serious question: IF someone were to ever step up to claim they are Satoshi Nakamoto, is there anything built into bitcoin that would work as undeniable proof? i.e. is there a known public key that would allow verification of a signed message?
Yes. |
|
|
|
|
Hoody, mohawk ... he's really just a big, cuddly teddy bear, what's not to love?
Kind of spooky those cyber-crimes goons were waiting for him when he got off the ferry ... wonder who's pulling their strings?
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin is simply not suitable for micro transactions. That's all. It is, however, bad that bitcoin.org is misleading people on this one.
Yep. |
|
|
|
Damn. I would fear for my safety if I were one of the politicians involved in this crap.
wow 1000th post
No shit ... the last time they tried this kind of crap heads start rolling, literally, and then inevitably some kind of trouble and wars soon after. It is like a generational clock and the dupes fall for it every time. |
|
|
|
I lost all my Bitcoins in an unfortunate boating accident.
I forgot the password, haxor took them, hard drive failure, brain wallet explosion when you kicked my door in, dog ate my paper wallet ... endless lulz to be had with that one. |
|
|
|
Is the size of the network the number of nodes or the number of transactions? What is the stated goal here, maximizing transactions or maximizing network nodes?
Repeating what was already said once again: you can safely transact without being a full node. On the other hand, what's the point in being a full node if you can't even transact since there's no more room in the blockchain for your transactions? Well that's disingenuous, there is always room in the blockchain (up to 1MByte per block at present), it is just the price to get in the blockchain that is at issue here. As I've tried to make clear on numerous occasions, above in this thread also, you cannot simply divorce the discussions on block size limits from fees as simply as you are wont to do here. The whole discussion is about who is going to be paying for the N*max_block_size*365*144 Mbytes annual global storage requirement for the blockchain (N - number of full network nodes), trying to block one's ears to discussions of fees is ignoring half the argument. Shall we have some quantification of optimal size of N for those who seem to be saying it is a number that can be discounted? |
|
|
|
Make sure you write off the value of the thousands of bitcoins you lost to pirate. I'm sure you can find a log of the transaction somewhere....
Actually, you can't write off losses on personal loans. Look it up before tax time! It was theft. Deductible. You can deduct losses in Ponzi schemes. Maybe, but I'm pretty sure you can claim back taxes previously paid on unrealised gains of the Poniz that turned out to be fabricated, I heard that Madoff's "investors" did. Seems to be lots of these FUD-like thread topics appearing, maybe getting close to an interim top I wonder? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
