|
I don't think we need any "legal" anything or any sort of licensing, but private training and certification companies would certainly be a good idea. One thought would be to have a company that can audit other companies to make sure they're using bitcoins properly and securely, allowing those companies that pass their inspections to display their seal of approval.
|
|
|
|
|
I used a ripple type system a few years ago, and it was a bust. Basically its an attempt to get trust to scale.
IMHO, the main use case for ripple is short-term loans, particularly for businesses.
One of the biggest flaws I see is the way that credit has to be extended. Each person has to figure out how much credit to extend to each person they are connected to, and modify that amount every so often. Its way too much work for most people to bother with. Perhaps if there were some sort of smart agents that could be used to automatically track and modify your crefit settings, it might work.
|
|
|
|
Why does anyone need identities when invoicing? Or more accurately, why must every invoice have an identity attached?
You will be able to generate and send unsigned invoices that has no identity attached. I'm cool with that, especially if this part of the proposal is implemented as a sort of plugin, where in the future a more secure and decentralized system can also be used. |
|
|
|
|
Don't know nothin about any mailing list, but this scares me: "Requests for payment (Invoices) are tied to authenticated identities using the only widely-deployed identity authentication system we have right now (X.509 certificates signed by root certificate authorities)"
I'm certainly no expert on bitcoin's protocol or code, but it sounds like a bad idea to add any sort of centralization. I've never really trusted 'root certificate authorities' and I have heard of exploits being successful against them.
Why does anyone need identities when invoicing? Or more accurately, why must every invoice have an identity attached?
|
|
|
|
Well, considering I can count to 31 on one hand, that's still a decent amount of them.
You know of 31 different people that you would willingly loan 10,000BTC? I can think of maybe 5. That's your question? I was wondering how he had 31 fingers on one hand... Lol no he's using a binary that's basically 2^(number of fingers you use). On one hand, that means counting to 31. If he had 31 fingers, he could count to 2.1Billion! Bingo! |
|
|
|
Yes. I could count them on one hand, but there are people that are that well trusted.
Not quite as many as there used to be, sadly. Well, considering I can count to 31 on one hand, that's still a decent amount of them. |
|
|
|
I have been involved with the Bitcoin Community for over a year. My name one these forums is my legal name.
The fact that I have to post in n00b forums is retarded, but I will delicately spam in accordance with the rules.
Also, Hi.
I smell bullshit. Well, more accurately, trollshit. Nah, I know Mr. Freeheart personally and he's not trolling; just annoyed with the necessary evil of newby prison. |
|
|
|
Aside from the rest of the PITA process, a notary isn't free. Cheapest I know of around here is $10.
You can often get stuff notarized for free at your bank  |
|
|
|
The vendor scene in New Hampshire isn't strong yet. There's a great cafe in Newmarket that takes bitcoins, there's our guitar store, and there are a number of online stores. The most action is probably at the weekly Bitcoin meetup where we do a lot of trades and usually draw about 15-20 people. We also get a few people a week coming into our guitar store just to buy bitcoins for cash. We've started talking about getting some of the small shops on the main drag here in Manchester to accept Bitcoin, and that's definitely something I want to push in the next few weeks. I bet I'm not the only one that would love to know more about all the various ways people try to get businesses on board. |
|
|
|
In New Hampshire, you want to have a porcupine and an FSP sticker then the cops are more likely to leave you alone. They understand that you'll fight charges in court, stand up for your rights, and generally be a hassle that isn't worth it. In New York they just think "he's asking for it". |
|
|
|
Just thinking out loud here, but a less professionally done gambling site might be more likely to have an error in the gambler's favor.  |
|
|
|
I think I've already addressed your concerns.
Yeah, probably mostly. Good to have them collected together though. 4. Colored coin protocol can work on any Bitcoin-like blockchain, so it's likely that if it will be heavily used then there will be specialized a blockchain just for colored coins. (E.g. ripplecoin.) But at start we want to use Bitcoin as a host for a number of reasons (e.g. ease of payment). No heavy use is expected at start, so don't worry about blockchain bloat and satoshis being out of circulation.
That's a good point. The first issuers can use the BTC blockchain, and when it is tested and working well, newer issuers can put theirs on another blockchain. I think that might work, and does address a lot of my concerns. Or perhaps the BTC blockchain can be where shares migrate to when an issuer becomes big and legitimate enough (i.e. the BTC blockchain can host shares of white market issuers, NMC blockchain can host shares of pink market, and DVC blockchain can be where most issuers start as black market). 6. If some kind of danger for network & security will be discovered (which is highly unlikely, but still...) you should be grateful that we've discovered it sooner rather than later.
Good point! I can see how that should work in theory. We should have some time before we need to know exactly how to do it in practice. Anyway, I am wanting to raise capital and am keenly interested in this idea of a decentralized share exchange capability. In addition to the ability to issue shares I'd also like the ability for my shareholders to be totally anonymous yet still be able to communicate back and forth including voting on proposals. |
|
|
|
|
I still have some concerns about this whole colored coin concept. Hopefully by bringing them up, they can either be addressed or another solution can be worked on.
Yesterday I did a quick count and calculated that if one satoshi were used to represent an individual share, the Dow 30 stocks would account for almost 1,000 bitcoins - General Electric by itself would consume 106 bitcoins. A rough guestimate based on that of the S&P 500 stocks means a similar amount of shares would consume about 15,000 bitcoins. That's still a negligible fraction of the total 21 million bitcoins, but imagine if not only were all shares in all current companies converted to satoshis but the explosion of newer shares caused by the more freed economy allowing more companies to exist - how many bitcoins would eventually be consumed? Add in shares of bonds, and how much now? Additionally, if we're going to use the BTC blockchain for share listings, why not use it for real estate? How many properties are there in the world? In the solar system? And why stop there? Why not use the BTC blockchain to register ownership of vehicles (using VINs perhaps)? How many vehicles are there and how many bitcoins would that remove from circulation as plain bitcoins? Of course, we can always add more significant digits, making units smaller than satoshis so using the 21 million we would never run out, but then we'd need to make that transition long before it would naturally occur.
Another concern is that adding new functionality to software always creates additional risks. Perhaps new security holes will be opened. Maybe it'll make the wallets more fragile. The user interfaces would probably have to be more complicated in many cases.
How would stock splits be handled under colored coins?
The reduction in total available plain bitcoins would cause deflation, which would be good for current holders of bitcoins, but is an unnecessary deflation fair?
IMHO, using something like namecoin's blockchain instead of the BTC blockchain would be a better route to go. You don't endanger the bitcoin network & currency, while allowing for unlimited ownership tokens. I've also heard that NMC is underutilized and in danger of being unmined, so expanding its purpose to cover property in general might give it the needed kick back into usefulness.
But as the discussion on the FB thread in the Free State Bitcoin group has pointed out, people are going to do what they want, so if the colored coins on the BTC blockchain is what works, so be it. The concept is pretty cool from a technical standpoint; I just don't want it's technical coolness to cause potential non-technical issues to be overlooked.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, once a year isn't enough, but maybe have one event each season with a different theme.
|
|
|
|
The NRA is a club for hunters.
The Gun Owners of America actually work to protect our 2nd Amendment right to bear arms.
GOA rated Mitt Romney with a D-
GOA rated Barack Obama with an F
The JPFO work pretty hard, too. And they have good reason. I like Second Amendment Sisters personally. I'm IRL friends with a few of the upper level folks. |
|
|
|
What the GOP needs to do to ever win any election again... is to absorb the libertarian candidates and run them as republicans. Then put the existing campaign machine into action for them. I bet we'd see votes in the range of 70-80%.
Ah well we can dream...
Or move to New Hampshire where that very thing is happening. Check out Mark Warden's example, for instance. Its still very much a work in progress, but it is working. Heck, we even got two of "us" elected to the state house as democrats. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
