 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »
|
|
7.) Has a stalker going by the handle "bbit"
|
|
|
|
Stage 0: Trading Bitcoin as a commodity. Speculation will drive value to one or two orders of magnitude.
Stage 1: Social Networking will adapt Bitcoin for micropayments. Speculation will drive value to one or two orders of magnitude.
Stage 2: Commerce will embrace Bitcoin as an overlay mechanism, like Paypal. Speculation will drive value one or two orders of magnitude.
Stage 3: Bitcoin will replace local banking for businesses enjoying low fees. Local legislatures will officially recognize Bitcoin. Speculation peaks.
Stage 4: Nations will begin to decouple currencies and adapt Bitcoin.
Stage 5: Nations and corporations will merge as they lose their competitive advantage over decentralized enterprises.
Stage 6: National borders will dissolve as decentralized enterprises evolve into AI driven civilization planning.
Stage 7: Bitcoin will evolve into a scientific-method based algorithm using Asimovian principles.
Stage 8: Ebil robot zombies will eat our brains and conquer the Universe.
Stage 9: Satoshi reveals himself to be an omnipotent beings who used his ultimate weapon, Bitcoin, to finally subjugate all 73 parallel universes under his control. |
|
|
|
|
Our Satoshi Nakamoto, Hallowed be thy name.
Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily ~144 blocks.
And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from fiat: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen
|
|
|
|
1.Government and central bank should face up to the existence of Bitcoin,
take control of most bitcoins by using the computing power of supercomputers all over the country.
It is impossible to "take control of most bitcoins" using computing power alone. Most bitcoins are in cold storage. A double spending attack would affect only a small fraction of bitcoins, or it would destroy the current block chain altogether if it persisted for long enough. In which case you are talking about outright destruction, not "facing up to existence". Either these people failed to RTMF, or this is a bad translation, or it's a fake. He's probably talking about using the Chinese supercomputers to mine a majority of the 16.13 million remaining bitcoins. Which would be marvelous. The price increase would be exponential. I find myself liking our Chinese overlords more and more. How would adding mining power increase the price? You're probably thinking of the other attack: buying up coins regardless of the cost. That would make the majority of this forum millionaires  |
|
|
|
1.Government and central bank should face up to the existence of Bitcoin,
take control of most bitcoins by using the computing power of supercomputers all over the country.
It is impossible to "take control of most bitcoins" using computing power alone. Most bitcoins are in cold storage. A double spending attack would affect only a small fraction of bitcoins, or it would destroy the current block chain altogether if it persisted for long enough. In which case you are talking about outright destruction, not "facing up to existence". Either these people failed to RTMF, or this is a bad translation, or it's a fake. He's probably talking about using the Chinese supercomputers to mine a majority of the 16.13 million remaining bitcoins. |
|
|
|
I firmly believe that this guy--地图集--needs to be stopped from spreading fud in forums in China.
If it's not too much trouble can you please post some links to his postings? I'd like read what he's spreading (economic takeover or mining takeover). It's one thing to be trolling the intertubes, but it's another thing altogether if he abuses his (albeit minor) position at the PBC to influence bitcoin. |
|
|
|
Trolling attempt detected indeed
Protip: speaking about cpu, gpu mining etc etc would have made the article LONGER
I translated part of the article and offered an insight on it, in a thread that desperately in need of some translations. What have you contributed to the discussion so far? |
|
|
|
A fail observation. There is nothing there telling you that he doesn't know gpu and that he will cpu mine.
The article speak about bitcoin in an economic point of view, of course it doesn't go in describing all existing supercomputers
Wrong again, this article is about bitcoin in general. He specifically mentioned mining, so it's not an economics paper. |
|
|
|
And that would be close to the truth. But while browsing with Tor might be untraceable , there is nothing untraceable about using your credit card over Tor. The point is you can use bitcoins with something like Tor; you cant use Tor to anonymize bank or paypal transactions or any other payment processor Im aware off, besides crypto currencies.
Look, this whole "bitcoin is completely anonymous" thing is well covered in the FAQ. If you wanna argue about it do it on the wiki. I'm just pointing out the author's mistake that's all. Yes, most of us already know about what you're saying. But the Chinese author didn't. That's why I pointed it out.
Thats your assumption, but unless that somehow refutes the author's point, who cares? The author didn't mentioned a single word about GPUs. That's a fact. Based on that fact I made the observation that the author isn't technically inclined and is simply looking at Bitcoins from the economic prospective. |
|
|
|
From wikipedia:
A free market is a competitive market where prices are determined by supply and demand. However, the term is also commonly used for markets in which economic intervention and regulation by the state is limited to tax collection, and enforcement of private ownership and contracts.
From Merriam-Webster:
An economic market operating by free competition
I do know how to use wikipedia. But thanks for being so kind in providing those paragraphs for my benefit. Have you somehow gleaned from my posts that I am a proponent of economic intervention by the regulators? Your copy-pasted wikipedia and merriam-webster definitions do not contradict my argument one iota. Even when regulation is limited to tax collection and enforcement of private contracts, how do you think that the authorities know how much tax to collect? Because the businesses they collect from are required to disclose their accounts and other financial activities. Or more simply, the state doesn't collect tax on corporations operating outside the state, like for example, Singapore where Bitcoinca is incorporated. So taxation is obviously out. Any other reason why they have to open their books? From wikipedia:
A free market is a competitive market where prices are determined by supply and demand. However, the term is also commonly used for markets in which economic intervention and regulation by the state is limited to tax collection, and enforcement of private ownership and contracts.
From Merriam-Webster:
An economic market operating by free competition
Again, as I already said, we as a community don't need to have the ability to impose sanctions on bitcoinica or otherwise intervene in the market to prevent them from operating, HOWEVER (I am copy and pasting my own statements now) we should at least have the ability to raise awareness of potential problems in the market that would be otherwise hidden, so that the market participants themselves are made aware and can correct the issues themselves by voting with their feet, or more appropriately, their bitcoin. In order for this to work, then we need transparency on at least some of the data. If a business is unwilling to provide this data, then the logical reason for not wanting to do this is that they are trying to hide something that they do not want their clients to know about. I agree that regulation is necessary, both IRL and in the bitcoin world. Except I'm more pragmatic. There's simply no way to enforce regulation on anonymous corporations without a physical presence and operating with a nearly untraceable currency. "Voting with their feet and their bitcoins" won't work because like Zhou repeatedly pointed out, Bitcoinica is currently a monopoly. If you open up a Bitcoinica clone with transparency then I would love to use your service, but until then Bitcoinica is free to release as little information as they want. |
|
|
|
He just spoke about supercomputers, never said "only cpu supercomputers"
He doesn't know about GPUs at all. So if you throw two supercomputers in front of him, one with GPU and one without, he'll start CPU mining on both of them and then go home. He won't start mining, he will hire someone who knows what to do. Obviously, yes. But my original point was that A. the author doesn't know about GPU mining and thus B. the author isn't technically inclined. |
|
|
|
He just spoke about supercomputers, never said "only cpu supercomputers"
He doesn't know about GPUs at all. So if you throw two supercomputers in front of him, one with GPU and one without, he'll start CPU mining on both of them and then go home. |
|
|
|
You should look up what "free market" means. There are no financial regulators in a free market. I don't disagree with your position, but if you're claiming we need bitcoin regulators and you want a free market then I need to point out that hypocrisy.
Even a completely 'free' market requires some amount of oversight. The fair and efficient operation of markets requires that monopolies are not allowed to abuse their dominance, and that competitors participate in the market in ways which do not restrict, prevent or distort competition. Regulators do not have to be given any actual powers, but should at least have the ability to raise awareness of potential problems in the market that would be otherwise hidden, so that the participants themselves are made aware and can correct the issues themselves. From wikipedia: A free market is a competitive market where prices are determined by supply and demand. However, the term is also commonly used for markets in which economic intervention and regulation by the state is limited to tax collection, and enforcement of private ownership and contracts. From Merriam-Webster: An economic market operating by free competition |
|
|
|
Very well researched paper for an outsider but he made 2 obvious mistakes:
1. He repeated stressed that Bitcoins offers total anonymity and is completely untraceable.
2. Failed to mention GPU mining and failed to realize that CPU mining, even with super computers, is not cost-effective.
It's clear that he has a good grasp of the economics behind Bitcoins, but he has little technical background.
And well you have even less than him GPU supercomputers exist. In our case, we need an ATI supercomputer and in China? There we go, it ALREADY exist http://www.dvhardware.net/article38967.htmlSigh... read what I wrote, please. Yes I know China has supercomputers with GPUs. But the author doesn't know about GPU mining was my point. |
|
|
|
So your argument boils down to "Bitcoinica could commit fraud so we need to check their books". It's a very nice argument because A. You don't need to show a shred of evidence, and B. You can profit from Bitcoinica's proprietary data without doing any work.
I'm only getting on your case because you mentioned "free market". In a free market there are no thugs who threaten to kidnap you if you don't show your books to them.
I don't like boiling anything down to a simplistic statement such as that. But yes. Bitcoinica might commit fraud and take your money, and you probably wouldn't even realize it had happened. Therefore we need to make sure that can't happen. Very 'nice' argument indeed. Also, how am I to produce any evidence when no data is published and none can be obtained? All I can do is point to lessons that were HARD learned in the real financial sector. We ignore these lessons at our peril. It's absolutely hilarious that you are trying to typecast ME as the thug, when I have literally ZERO power to do anything but try and convince others that there is a significant potential issue here. There ARE 'thugs' who 'kidnap' you in the free market if you refuse to show them your books. They are called financial regulators. All financial institutions have to document for them exactly what they are doing with their depositors money. Pesky, aren't they? Since we don't have their help here, we need to do the job they normally do ourselves. If you do not want to heed caution, then throw it to the wind for all I care, and deposit all of your coin with bitcoinica. I have no vendetta against bitcoinica, I do not use their services, and have no reason otherwise to continue this line of argument other than for the good of the bitcoin economy. You are entitled to disagree with me, but I have no obligation to save you from your own stupidity. You should look up what "free market" means. There are no financial regulators in a free market. I don't disagree with your position, but if you're claiming we need bitcoin regulators and you want a free market then I need to point out that hypocrisy. |
|
|
|
Please answer a few simple questions for me, mjcmurfy.
Has Bitcoinica ever coerced anyone into using their services?
Has Bitcoinica ever committed fraud against its users or its counter-parties?
If the answers to the first two questions are negative, then why do you feel entitled to Bitcoinica's proprietary data? Do they owe you anything?
1) No 2) No and 3) No, they owe me nothing. If you want a more thorough explanation of why I think an overview of this data is necessary, then maybe you should actually read my previous posts. Just because they have not defrauded anyone to date, does not mean that they might not in the future. The only way to monitor the platform is with this information. If bitcoinica were operating in the financial system proper, do you think they would be able to evade these questions the way they are able to currently? And do you think people would be jumping to their defense on the issue? Would you deposit your money with a bank who would give two fingers up to the financial services regulators? So your argument boils down to "Bitcoinica could commit fraud so we need to check their books". It's a very nice argument because A. You don't need to show a shred of evidence, and B. You can profit from Bitcoinica's proprietary data without doing any work. I'm only getting on your case because you mentioned "free market". In a free market there are no thugs who threaten to kidnap you if you don't show your books to them. |
|
|
|
Which arguably is true if you take proper precautions (mixing your coins, tor, etc).
Tor isn't part of bitcoin though. Using your argument I could say "The internet offers total anonymity and is completely untraceable" because I can browser the internet through tor. Actually China already has a few supercomputers with GPUs. IIRC the current ones are all nVidia based, so I dont know how effective they will be, but as a forward looking statement its certainly true that its feasible for a state player (particularly one like China). Also the cost of developing an asic for bitcoin mining is on the order of a few million $, thats pocket change for a country like China (and perhaps useful for other stuff too); if they do that, they could outhash the rest of us in a blink of the eye.
Yes, most of us already know about what you're saying. But the Chinese author didn't. That's why I pointed it out. |
|
|
|
|
