I would bet my money on a currency that would replace mining with something less wasteful. This probably cannot be fully decentralized. Bitcoin showed that the time for independent cryptography based currencies has came - but I am not comfortable with the rate at which bitcoin is spending money.
If bitcoin was not paying for itself, in terms of the services it is providing, value information transfers, storage, etc, then it would not be profitable. Money costs. (Gold digging, fiat confidence defending, etc) |
|
|
|
|
Money, in its essence, is an information technology.
The informational content is value.
In hindsight, it will be obvious that the internet has come up with a superior form of money ... it may not be bitcoin though.
|
|
|
|
Quoted from the downtime thread ( http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=13230 - I will post downtime related updates only over there in the future): It's back up.. for the moment. You guys are putting too much load on it by using it so much. ;-) Seriously though, I'm running into a number of scaling issues which show that the Bitcoin daemon hasn't really been used in production (large wallet.dat) much. I'm afraid there isn't an over-night fix for this, so the site might be flaky over the next days/weeks until I can figure out some solutions and/or workarounds. Thanks for this service by the way, it's really useful and (so far) dependable.
Thx for the encouragement. I'm glad it's useful to some people. Sorry about the downtime. I hope I can return to the previous level of stability once this growing pain is sorted out. jav, what's your business model for this great service? How do you expect for pay for it when/if it scales up to appreciable cost size? thnx. |
|
|
|
but a namecoin does not buy what a bitcoin will buy.
It is nothing like the same as an IPO .... locking mining together will mean they will cost the same to produce. It is like mining silver as a by-product to gold mining ... except the number of possible by-product "minerals" in this case is infinite. |
|
|
|
The namecoin blockchain is testing/implementing a change to hook itself into the mining hashpower of bitcoin, so-called merged mining or shared work. https://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=29074.0http://dot-bit.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=217&start=10#p1242https://github.com/vinced/namecoin/blob/mergedmine/doc/README_merged-mining.mdIt is clear that the economic incentives for miners will be to adopt this since there is limited cost with the added benefit of solving lesser difficulty chain blocks as a "by-product" to bitcoin mining. The obvious medium to longer term outcome of this is to raise the difficulty of the auxiliary chain to close to that of bitcoin. An auxiliary chain with a difficulty nearly equal to bitcoin clearly has a cost-to-mine also nearly equal to bitcoin. So we would have another blockchain, with 21 million units, closely locked into bitcoin valuation economics via the cost of production. Isn't this introducing a mechanism for ultimately doubling the number of *coins hooked onto the bitcoin hash power, i.e. inflation by proxy? |
|
|
|
There are plenty of blockchains waiting in the wings, as soon as aux blockchain mining is worked out and debugged and understood there will probably be quite a few chains looking to be aux chains. So please help them understand!  -MarkM- You seem to be in the know ... care to share your wisdom? |
|
|
|
|
What about the economic performance disadvantages of the respective currencies?
Won't this devalue bitcoin?
|
|
|
|
|
This sounds too good to be true.
Where's the disadvantages list?
|
|
|
|
|
bitcoin needs to compete or fade away on its merits/flaws ... co-opting competing chains only devalues/dilutes its worth by making a mockery of the "only 21 million claim" ...
.... at least the deflation scaremongers can go fo now that the true nature of free market money is made obvious.
|
|
|
|
Does this patch give any sort of warning if bitcoin isn't being used through a proxy? It raises the valid question whether the satoshi bitcoin client should actually have some kind of warning/button/icon to indicate that it isn't being used through a proxy. (I mean checking in the Options... is not hard but all browsers now have the little padlock icon when a secure SSL connection is active ... for example.) |
|
|
|
|
coderr:
Will your patch integrate with the wallet management tools of the next release (0.3.25) with wallet encryption?
|
|
|
|
|
the ben bernank looked he just swallowed a rat ... is gold money ... nup!
... but we got computer hard drives full of worthless CDO, FNM, FMC promises .... and theys really is good money cause we just printed up a $5.1 trillion storm in FRN against them ....
mwhhaaaaaaaaaa! the biggest poker bluff of the century so far, right there.
crazy times people.
|
|
|
|
 lower case, how will this one shrink I wonder? |
|
|
|
|
Starting to smell like gold loans ... they haven't blown up, just yet. They'll be the last to go, the final denouement on a bankrupt system.
|
|
|
|
Another NPR podcast today, this one "Virtual Currency: Seed Of Poor Spending Habits?" - http://www.npr.org/2011/07/13/137818171Because yesterday's jabs weren't enough to discourage its audience, NPR went with another approach -- it's so dangerous! "The technology has outpaced the ethics". Hit piece ... state mouthpiece opens up the slanted onslaught. |
|
|
|
 Bhash (bit of a hack job) |
|
|
|
|
What you physically possess in the wallet.dat on your computer is the private key that gives you access rights to move value around on the blockchain.
It more like a property right than a property per se. The property right, i.e. the private key, is also a property and can also have a value attached to it, like a land property title can become more valuable than the land in areas where titles have been made artificially scarce by subdivision by-laws and is also similar to legal claims on ownership rights to production like options, futures, derivatives, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Just to stop all the FUD spreading. Namecoins are not unlimited supply, in fact they are in MORE limited supply than bitcoins.
They have the same 21 million coin issuance algorithm AND some coins are spent out of existence (63,000) in the early days to prevent domain name squatting and hoarding by early adopters.
tl;dr Namecoins are more scarce than bitcoins.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
