Good article.


The more I see this type of response, the more I think this is either the "Not Invented Here Syndrome", or a preference for a stalemate, and both are very sad.  For people who have made a livelihood on fighting the Fed, having the Fed disappear means loosing their job and it scares them.  A few are transitioning to the other side and making real effort to fix things, but most appear to not want to.  Same type of stalemate behavior is going on in the War on Drugs, War on Terror, etc., and nearly everybody in a position of power is working towards a stalemate that keeps the money flowing to them rather than actually fixing the problem.

www.thesurvivalpodcast.com/feedback-11-25-13

The vast majority of today's episode is a level-headed discussion of Bitcoin.  Several technical errors, but he freely admits that he doesn't really understand how the technical aspects work.

That is really not that much money when you are creating 85 Billion USD out of thin air every month... :/

So much FUD...


What happened to Gold 2.0?  Skipping versions, I guess...


Well, according to a (voluntary) survey of Bitcoin users, statistically you are more likely to have given to a charity with bitcoin than to have bought narcotics.  If "doing something wrong" now includes giving to charities, the world is screwed... 


I'm going to assume that is sarcasm there...

Per the forum guidelines that can be found here, the topic title should start with a date in the format YYYY-MM-DD, which in this case I think is 2013-06-14.

r313cYGbCuEBr1nQbVY4f8kKQ1JJEzSDxh

The comparison is not completely useless, because it is possible to estimate the hashrate the supercomputers could sustain and compare that to the current bitcoin network. Then it is comparing apples to apples.  The comparison done is going the other way, trying to estimate the FLOPS rat of the bitcoin network's hashrate.

I think the comparison is interesting in that it gives us a good idea of how much impact th eexisting supercomputers could affect the bitcoin network if they were reprogrammed to mine bitcoin efficiently.  The fact that even with all 500 top super computers turned on bitcoin, they could capture about 10% of the hashrate is rather interesting and somewhat comforting that we are beyond the possibility of a 51% attact by these supercomputers. If somebody was to try a 51% attack, they would have to build the system from scratch and not just repurpose an existing system.

The post title should start with the date the article was published in the format 2013-05-21 to conform to the press section's guidelines.


I thought the same thing. I know certain sections of society oppose all forms of globalization, but personally, I think they are confusing global tyranny with globalization in general, which also includes global liberty. I am rooting for the global liberty side of things. Why shouldn't I want my fellow human to have the same freedoms that I have and work continually to expand those freedoms. I certainly haven't found a valid reason.

The Gliph site describes itself as "Secure Texting + Bitcoin Payments", so encrypted text messages.  Entirely possible for it to be both secure and social by limiting messages to only your contacts.

Looks like they state that they support deposits of bitcoins into webmoney accounts, but I can't seem to find if there is a way to withdraw to bitcoins.  Has anyone with better search skills than me found out?

If I am not mistaken, that should be Wikileaks.  If not, since when did the government start cracking down of Wikipedia fincancing?

I found the infographic to be both accurate and relatively simple.  It includes just enough technical details to be accurate, but not so much that the process gets buried in the details.  I can't really judge how understandable it is to somebody not familiar with cryptography because I can't temporarily forget how cryptography works.  The only inaccuracy I could find was that the block subsidy is now 25 BTC and not the 50 BTC the graphic shows, but that would be fairly simple to correct.  I could not detect any fundamental errors.

Well done, zerohedge.

The date should have the format 2013-05-09 to match the other articles in the press section and to conform to the press section guidelines.

Only watched the first half, stopped once they got to the [they will have to issue more if it becomes popular].    Bitcoin absolutely does not have a central authority and I am quite sure that there never will be one because it is that property that makes so many people interested in bitcoin as a long-term store of value.  To change this would cause bitcoin to cease to be bitcoin.

For those interested in reading more about this story, this post on reddit looks to be the original post mentioned in the story.

Another well-balanced article.  Nice.  I hope this trend continues, and I hope more small businesses start accepting bitcoin along side their other payment options.

Awesome.  I am really looking forward to seeing where this ends up.

I hope somebody got that man a Coke. 

If the traditional, legacy exchanges won't trade bitcoin, we'll make our own.

Looks like a duplicate of https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=188673.0

Seems like we get a lot of time travelers here. About ever other week I get to see an article from the future.  The travelers must feel at home here. 

Perhaps a bit.

I guess I'm just a bit tired of the media trying to paint us all as druggie ponzie schemers involved in Fast and Furious gun trafficing.  There theoretically could be one (or maybe two) of those here, but I am not among them.  It seems like every article the media puts out mention drugs, guns, ponzi schemes or all three.  The only reasons I can think of for this is ignorance and malevalence, and the more it happens, the more the cynic in me leans toward the latter.  Now I'm just ranting. Again. 

Er.. This, again...   I think the media liks using the most outrageous examples in an attempt to drive pageviews/ratings.  I highly doubt that a heroin-stuffed assault rifle will ever be sold for bitcoin in any other context than "See! I told you it could be done!".  Both of those items are logistically better handled separately.

And anyways, I would much rather that money go to supporting small businesses and charities, and I am fairly certain I am not alone in that.  I just don't see a purpose to recreational drug (ab)use.