4621
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Should money have intrisic value ?
|
on: December 03, 2010, 06:23:57 AM
|
Intrinsic value is required for money to arise in a barter economy.
Once we get beyond that, we can now bootstrap a currency like bitcoin.
Now we have information by which we can perform economic calculation.
The introduction of money into a barter economy only serves as a 'unknown third party' barter, it doesn't otherwise alter the basis of the exchange. I don't otherwise understand your statement. What have we 'gotten beyond' in order to bootstrap, and why is it a prerequisite? http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583.0
|
|
|
4622
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Should money have intrisic value ?
|
on: December 03, 2010, 03:49:40 AM
|
Intrinsic value is required for money to arise in a barter economy.
Once we get beyond that, we can now bootstrap a currency like bitcoin.
Now we have information by which we can perform economic calculation.
|
|
|
4623
|
Economy / Gambling discussion / Re: Bitcoin Casino
|
on: December 03, 2010, 03:23:09 AM
|
Hi everyone, I was thinking of making some online casino game based around Bitcoin.. just wonder if there would be any legal issues surrounding that. I mean, would it qualify as online gambling? The games would probably include: There's already a casino and it's an MMORPG. http://dragons.tl
|
|
|
4627
|
Other / Off-topic / Re: Political Assessment
|
on: December 02, 2010, 11:40:57 PM
|
What would happen if there was NO public transport at all? The current amount of traffic jams would be nothing, costs for maintaining your good roads would go up (more traffic on the road), fuel prices would go up (more demand for fuel). While not direct, you will still be profiting from the fact that people make use of public transport. My bus this morning was transporting about average 60 people, most cars that I see in the morning have only 1 person in there. Let's say that this one bus would save 50 cars on the road (all going in the same direction)... and this is only one bus.
Why would public transport disappear? A bus is more fuel efficient and should benefit from the economy of scale. There would be more train tracks. Trucks are used for local transport of material instead.
|
|
|
4632
|
Other / Off-topic / Re: Libertarians/Anarchists Answer Me This
|
on: December 02, 2010, 06:05:53 PM
|
The most optimal resource allocation would be if the ice cream vendors were evenly spread out (something like x1 = 250m and x2 =750m). In this configuration nobody ever has to walk further than 250m to buy an ice cream.
Why would this be the most optimal resource allocation? If your goal is to make ice cream available to the masses, then it make sense to allocate to places where people actually will buy ice creams?
|
|
|
4634
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: BitDNS and Generalizing Bitcoin
|
on: December 02, 2010, 05:56:31 PM
|
None of these are intractable problems, and IMHO much of this makes domain addresses much more secure than is the case at the moment with domain addresses you get from GoDaddy, Verisign, or ICANN directly. Social hacking and some other generally minor hacking by somebody with just some casual knowledge about computers is all that is really necessary at the moment to change most domain registrations or "steal" a domain.
Can you please explain what you mean by this?
|
|
|
4635
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: BitDNS and Generalizing Bitcoin
|
on: December 02, 2010, 05:52:22 PM
|
The loss of sex.bitcoin would surely make sexy.bitcoin and xxx.bitcoin more valuable.
I concede that one. I don't argue from a matter of principle, just from a personal preference that I would prefer non-expiring but losable domain names, compared to ones that must be renewed regularly or lost to others.
Then this is a matter of competition between various BitDNS system then.
|
|
|
4636
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: BitDNS and Generalizing Bitcoin
|
on: December 02, 2010, 05:33:20 PM
|
It's the same as with bitcoins, it just makes the remaining names more valuable.
if sex.bitcoin is lost for example, it can't be used forever. And there is only one sex.bitcoin in the whole universe. It doesn't necessary make other domain names more valuable. What it does though is make certain resource useless.
|
|
|
4637
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: BitDNS and Generalizing Bitcoin
|
on: December 02, 2010, 05:21:15 PM
|
I assumed you would have the domain name forever without further fee. After all, we don't pay an annual fee to keep our bitcoins working.
The fees could come from domain name transfers, and of course the generation of new domain names.
If someone lost their wallet, their domain name stay with them forever, with no way to transfer it. Eventually, you get a long string of really good domain name that can't be used forever.
|
|
|
4639
|
Bitcoin / Project Development / Bitcoin T-Shirt
|
on: December 02, 2010, 04:58:10 PM
|
I was thinking of selling bitcoin t-shirt and mugs to help fund the various bitcoin bounty and other projects here.
What do you guys think?
|
|
|
|