Peter Schiff inc = Tyler Durden - ZH inc?

The negativity seems to stem from an inner conflict struggling with issues surrounding the foreign concept of monetary freedom.

It is like you open the cage door on a chimp that has been locked up for decades, basically they go nuts ... they look at the door and their eyes tell them it is open but their brain cannot comprehend it because it has never seen the cage door open. Soon the will poke their noses out of the cage (buy a saotshi or two), run around a little and them run back inside the cage (USD) ...  observing it makes for great lolz, the big, bold freedom campaigners confronting a possible freedom they never really believed in, just like to talk about.

Really? Didn't know that, I thought they were on big growth curve. What is the reason do you think?

No, a better solution would be if SatoshiDICE were to take all their transactions off-chain, or bundle them into a single hourly, daily transaction, etc ... just like a large, semi-trusted transactions clearer who had to pay true cost for transactions, i.e a bank or e-wallet might do.

SatoshiDICE is free-loading off our cpu cycles and hard-drive space because the network is letting it.

now that's really interesting. She seems like a very clever lady (admit to a slight crush) and comes up with some extremely perceptive insights, I wonder if it is her who has figured out how they are to secure the bitcoin millionaire's fortune?

NB: it doesn't seem advisable to advertise if one has that kind of wealth tied up in bitcoin unless you are A-grade confident of your computer security.

Yep, pigtail is best idea for this device, imo.

Any update on the ETA? ... I can't wait.

I'm pretty sure SatoshiDICE could run exactly as it is now without bloating the blockchain (and the the tens of thousands of harddrives that support bitcoin). But they choose not to run SatoshiDICE off-chain, for whatever reason.

It is a tragedy of the commons situation that SatoshiDICE has taken advantage of to 'profit' at the expense of storage space on other people's hard-drives (and now CPU cycles). Until fees become appreciable enough that the blockchain is no longer a common good but a commercial asset, anyone can CHOOSE to abuse the goodwill of others.

Would anyone tolerate a herd of grazing animals in Central Park NY?

I don't even know anyone who plays SatoshiDICE. I have a hunch it is some kind of contrived "stress-test" or bitcoin-shuffling operation where the majority of trades are actually automated. The size of the bitcoin user base is nowhere near big enough to support the volume of trades if they are being performed by individuals hitting buttons. I don't even think the $500K profit is real, it maybe just bitcoin that has been moved from one location to another, under the guise of "profit".

DYODD.

I find it interesting that this topic seem to get dragged out on weekends.

It is like the old football that a kid gets out to play with on a Saturday ... kicks it around, pretends to be an all star, etc ... then Monday rolls around.

There is no deflationary problem, but it is fun to wonder what it would be like if there was one?

Bitcoin cannot "launder" money because it is not money, it is Bitcoin.

It is as simple as that, the state has decided, and made legal, what is "money" and it is not bitcoin. The legal cage designed by the statists to keep the inmates in, has now become a money prison of their own making for the statists.

Weird, it is like the govt. hates its citizens or something ... drone strikes, bank account snooping, wiretaps, ....

None of the people involved in the Ponzi ever think it is a Ponzi 

</troll>

Bitinstant (and any others) need to look at Namecoin to secure their DNS ... or stuff like this will keep happening.

If you are going to trust the blockchain with your commercial success you will need to secure other entry points to your business with similar level security, imho.

I wholeheartedly agree with you ... and it makes for a great selling point for any payment system to have I would say.

It is sad that the minority scumbags in Nigeria, or wherever, can ruin it for the majority of good people in those regions ... but that's how our current payment systems are effectively discriminating, because they are deficient, and bloated with the AML/KYC regulations, such that it is easier for the current players to ignore and exclude whole continents from the Internet economy rather than attempt to fix it.

Great selling point ... since it is the same tech. that can enable commerce in the most challenging black markets means it can enable commerce anywhere.

I think transaction volume vastly overstates real trade activity since there is a lot of bitcoin shuffling that happens with people moving from one wallet/address to another and coin mixing bots, etc. In fact, I don't see how you can get those kinds of figures without doing surveys of users ... the blockchain might then be used to correlate some of that data for extrapolations at a later date ...

The parallels for this Mt. Gox - Coinlab transition are eerily similar to the Bitcoinica -Intersango transition.

I really wonder who thought it would be a good idea to move such a large part of the Bitcoin business to the country with the most overt, aggressive financial industry regulatory-capture regime? It's like they are walking into the lion's den willingly. Anyway, good luck to those of you sticking with ship .... although it appears to be taking on water. The announcement last week was that iceberg was indeed real, not that the boat did not hit.

Whoah!

The cat is getting well and truly out of the bag. Large, unregulated gambling payments are gonna attract unwanted attention for sure I'd say. Fulltilt and PokerStars will have to follow up before long if bitcoin payments become big for WinPoker. Who needs mixers when you got casinos?

Thanks, very much enjoyed that.

Good pun, there is indeed an issue ... but I could be wrong. I don't have any problem with discussions of the issuance function or describing where the Bitcoin currency comes from.

Specifically, I saw that the current wording claims the network is  "... managing transactions and issuing money ...",  surely safer (and more correct) to say "... managing transactions and issuing Bitcoin ..." or "... managing transactions and issuing currency ..."?

I would advise to just stay as far away as possible from referring to bitcoin as "money" and you don't need to anyway. Anywhere you feel inclined to write "money" just substitute "Bitcoin". If nothing else it is unnecessarily pretentious anyway and opens it up to claims of false advertising/prospectus if the whole project collapses.

Yeah, what's an order of magnitude amongst friends anyway? Either way it would be wild ride.

You have got to admire Falkvinge's cahajone's for going all-in way back when he did .... but I think his estimates are heavily discounting the risk from bitcoin2.0-like competition.

Just a suggestion, but you might ask one of the legal minds that loiter around here to pass an eye over it ...

e.g. ... claiming to "issue money" has been known to provoke the full fury of the state machinery.

Maybe disclaimers and etc. ... unless it is being hosted in an "undisclosed location" the site needs to be mindful of the jurisdiction of its hosting to the legal claims it is making on the web pages at a minimum.