Bitcoin Forum
December 11, 2017, 11:24:25 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
  Home Help Search Donate Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 ... 369 »
341  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: What are the most convincing arguments against Bitcoin? on: December 22, 2013, 10:03:53 PM
1. Thats not what a 51% attack is and doesnt let you do that. do research.
2.bitcon isnt centralized, pools are false centralization. ie. if someone pulls some shady stuff, the people 'get out of the water' and they lose the hashrate and peoples faith in them, pool owner then loses their income stream. any other form of centralization is just as much BS. do research.
3.no it doesnt... do research...
3. If this was the case we would have prunning already

As far as I have understood, Gavin and the developers have promised that pruning will be ready "when it is necessary". I have no reason to doubt the developer team, but when is it really necessary to prune, at 1TB? Has anyone come up with a timeline? What proof is there that pruning will be possible when it really is necessary?

I recently inquired about this issue, and the general response was that pruning is already emplimented in the reference codebase, but isn't yet enabled for the offical client.  This is mostly because of concern about what kind of impact widespread pruning would have on the "many copies keeps data safe" stragedy that the blockchain employs.  Some of the developers don't believe that there are enough full clients at the moment, and that enabling pruning would result in a significant drop in the number of compete copies of the blockchain from which new clients could bootstrap.  I'm not a programmer, but it was strongly implied that certain power users with the programming skills to enable this code themselves already do prune.  So when they say that pruning will become available when it's necessary, they kind of mean that they will turn it on when they feel that the burden of running a full client is reducing the number of full clients, and that we are not to that point yet.
342  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: What are the most convincing arguments against Bitcoin? on: December 22, 2013, 09:57:11 PM
This is clearly an issue. The more unequal the spread of wealth the more problems.
Other way around.
Equal spread of wealth = everyone is poor, downtrodden, and live short brutish lives.
The more unequal the spread of wealth the more prosperous a society is for everyone, even the people at the bottom.

This is no more true as an absolute than the false meme that an equal spread of wealth leads to prosperity for the greatest number.  The causes of such wealth disparity is also important to consider.
343  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: What are the most convincing arguments against Bitcoin? on: December 22, 2013, 09:54:12 PM

The other big problem with Bitcoin is that it isn't legal tender, and thus it is taxed on changes in its value unlike legal tender. Thus Bitcoin can NEVER be a non-anonymous currency.

So Bitcoin has very powerful arguments against it. The OP is naive.

In Germany, neither Gold nor Gold 2.0 is taxed (VAT).

http://www.welt.de/finanzen/article120823372/Zahlungen-mit-Bitcoins-sind-umsatzsteuerfrei.html
http://www.zerohedge.com/node/477785


Germany is an example of a country that so far has managed to balance it's socialism with strong individual rights in many cases, after the war it has always championed a hard currency (even if it is a hard fiat currency) in addition to having a strongly federal political system as well as having a populace generally more politically aware than most others. However, they have no freedom of speech for neo-nazi groups, and much worse, criticism of Israel is still taboo.


I think your admiration for the German solution to be misplaced.  It's not just that neo-nazi based ideologies or israeli dissent that is verboten.  Any kind of subculture at all is verboten, although (obviously) some are ignored.  Notablely, however, Christian based homeschooling is not ignored; and a ban on home education of any kind remains in effect as the last edict started by Aldolf hitler still in effect.  Put another way; while politics in Germany functionally ignores the dark side of Islam, but puts devout Christians who consider German state schools to be contrary to their faith in the same catagory as neo-nazi hate groups.  One might come to the conclusion that German polticos fear the idology of such (non-state) Christian spreading into a greater percentage of the electorate. 
344  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: What does the bible say about Bitcoin? on: December 22, 2013, 09:33:12 PM
There is not one scarp of evidence for a god. Not one

Of course not.  If there were any real evidence of God, or even of a spirtual plane of any kind, your freedom of choice would cease to exist.  You choose to not seek, which is fine.  Your salvation is your problem, not mine.  I have no interest in convincing you otherwise, but to assume that just because wars have been fought with religion as the official cause are the true drivers for the kings and warlords that prosecute such wars is to be woefully ignorant of both history and human nature.  The principle of 'Baptists & bootleggers' has been true for thousands of years, or as long as human civilizations have existed, whichever is longer.
345  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: What does the bible say about Bitcoin? on: December 22, 2013, 07:53:42 PM
The bible says it is ok to trade slaves too.


If you knew as much about the bible as you think you do, you would also know that the term 'slaves' as used in the context of the old testament is a mistranslation into English.  When we think of 'slaves' we think of chattel slavery, but the old testament does specify that, not only did "slaves" have rights (including work rules), but a faithful "slave" earned the hand of the master's eldest daughter after 7 years of service.  This was for the infidels that Jews captured in warfare, they were forbidden from buying servents from either one another or from infidels.  Can you imagine "modern" Islam (that considers Jews to be infidels) offering their eldest daughters to a Jewish man after seven years, even if he openly converted to Islam?

The concept of chattel slavery has no equivalent in the Bible, old or new; and was not permitted for the ancient Israelites, either.  For the most part, our modern concept of slavery (i.e. the ability to "own" another human being) can be traced back to the Persians.
346  Other / Politics & Society / Re: DUI lawyer near me now accepting Bitcoins on: December 21, 2013, 01:57:09 PM
Ok more and more companys and users use bitcoin why it's still so low ??  587 USD ? :/

You think that is low?  It was $17 at the start of the year!
347  Other / Off-topic / Re: I'm giving away Bitcoin with this Christmas Card on: December 20, 2013, 01:03:47 AM
I don't suppose that you'd be willing to link a copy of your template, would you?
348  Other / Politics & Society / DUI lawyer near me now accepting Bitcoins on: December 19, 2013, 10:20:44 PM
http://www.wdrb.com/story/24256929/louisville-law-firm-accepting-bitcoin-as-payment
349  Other / Politics & Society / Re: US health care mandate (Obamacare) on: December 19, 2013, 07:04:44 PM
...snip...

lol really?  your doctor would be sued for malpractice if he did not keep records.  And you regard it as "total data collection on all citizens" that doctors have records and that the security services have access to the records with a warrant?

Seriously, is that all that is wrong with Obamacare?  You must be so happy!

They don't need a warrant anymore.  I've seen this first hand.

At the risk of going wildly off topic, are you sure what you saw was legal and ethical?  Doctor/patient confidentiality is a big deal.  Doctors here in the UK are ethically obliged to report someone that falls into certain categories (don't ask me for list) but the police have to get a warrant to see a random person's records.

Ethical, no.  Quite legal, though.  Doctor patient confidentialtiy is now a meaningless term in these United States; partly due to Obamacare, and partly due to other percurser laws.
350  Other / Politics & Society / Re: US health care mandate (Obamacare) on: December 19, 2013, 07:29:42 AM
....

You have entered tinfoil hat mode.  Doctors keep records and as such every country in the world has access to the medical records of its population.  Find something serious to worry about.  Surely obamacare can't be such a success that this is all you can find to criticise?
Every country has access?  Really?

Feel free to point me to a country where the security services can't get a warrant for medical records.
No goal post shifting please.  We are talking here about total data collection on all citizens.

With no warrants whatsoever.

lol really?  your doctor would be sued for malpractice if he did not keep records.  And you regard it as "total data collection on all citizens" that doctors have records and that the security services have access to the records with a warrant?

Seriously, is that all that is wrong with Obamacare?  You must be so happy!

They don't need a warrant anymore.  I've seen this first hand.
351  Economy / Economics / Re: Why bitcoin isn't currency. on: December 19, 2013, 05:39:08 AM
@OP By definition , currency is usually backed, defined and produced by a government or some authority.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rai_stones

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wampum#Currency
352  Economy / Economics / Re: Bitcoin's first major deflation event, and its consequences on: December 19, 2013, 05:37:33 AM
An asset is something that generates revenue, bitcoin does that.

Bitcoin does not generate revenue.  Bitcoin goes up and down in market value, that is quite different.

Quote

 A stock is an asset and is speculative for the most part people invest in stocks for capital gain,

While a stock is often a speculative investment vehicle, stocks are (at the core) contractual evidence that you own a definable piece of a business venture; which (presumedly) exists to turn a profit.  It's the profit that makes the stock an asset, not it's speculative nature.

Quote
but that is fine if you want to call it a commodity instead of an asset


Nor is it a commodity, because it has no non-monetary utility.  No one desires to aquire bitcoins for their own sake, but to spend or sell them at a later date.  You can't really do anything else with them, at least not yet.  (Colored coins might change that analysis later)

Quote

 so long as you dont call it currency which it clearly is not.

Bitcoin is a currency, as I noted in the "bitcoin is not a currency" thread on several occasions.


Bullshit!

Just because you say it, does not make it so.  Challenge my reasoning, accept that I'm correct, or fade away.
353  Economy / Economics / Re: Why bitcoin isn't currency. on: December 19, 2013, 05:34:49 AM
@OP By definition , currency is usually backed, defined and produced by a government or some authority.

Usually.
354  Economy / Economics / Re: Why bitcoin isn't currency. on: December 19, 2013, 05:33:47 AM
A baseball card is a medium of exchange, magic cards were designed to be exchanged are they currency?

Baseball cards are designed to be exchanged as a collectable, not as an actual medium-of-exchange.

Quote

No, medium of exchange is one function of currency another is unit of account bitcoin is not a unit of account because it is not a unit.


A bitcoin is as much of a unit of value as the US Dollar is, as I have noted repeatedly in this very thread.  A unit does not require an external reference, as you seem to claim.  All that is required that a unit exist, is that more than a few people agree upon a (preferablely not vague, but even that is not a requirement; take a look at the variance in the concept of a "cord" of firewood) standard.  The bitcoin exchange markets set the 'standard' of price for a bitcoin on an ongoing basis.  But in the long term, a bitcoin is a bitcoin in as much as a dollar is a dollar.

Quote

If it is a currency it is going for the the most useless currency of all time... in other words if bitcoin is a currency it is a shit one.


Okay.  Your opinion is well known on this matter, but it doesn't change the fact that Bitcoin is a currency.

Quote
You are a Ron Paul supporter right? Why advocate for something that wont work? It isnt valuable as a commodity and doesnt work as a currency.


Just because it may not work for you as a currency, doesn't mean it doesn't work for me.  I've used it as such on numerous occasions in the past. I expect to continue to do so; but even if I'm wrong about such an expectation does not imply that Bitcoin is not presently a currency, because it provably is.  A Continental was a currency once as well, but that doesnt' mean that they must be 'worth a Continental' today to have been a currency in 1778.  Maybe Bitcoin will fade away like so many others here believe, and maybe it won't; but if I can buy stuff online using Bitcoin, and only Bitcoin, in trade; then Bitcoin is a currency now, regardless of how or why that is so.
355  Economy / Economics / Re: Bitcoin's first major deflation event, and its consequences on: December 19, 2013, 05:08:30 AM
An asset is something that generates revenue, bitcoin does that.

Bitcoin does not generate revenue.  Bitcoin goes up and down in market value, that is quite different.

Quote

 A stock is an asset and is speculative for the most part people invest in stocks for capital gain,

While a stock is often a speculative investment vehicle, stocks are (at the core) contractual evidence that you own a definable piece of a business venture; which (presumedly) exists to turn a profit.  It's the profit that makes the stock an asset, not it's speculative nature.

Quote
but that is fine if you want to call it a commodity instead of an asset


Nor is it a commodity, because it has no non-monetary utility.  No one desires to aquire bitcoins for their own sake, but to spend or sell them at a later date.  You can't really do anything else with them, at least not yet.  (Colored coins might change that analysis later)

Quote

 so long as you dont call it currency which it clearly is not.

Bitcoin is a currency, as I noted in the "bitcoin is not a currency" thread on several occasions.
356  Economy / Economics / Re: Why bitcoin isn't currency. on: December 19, 2013, 04:56:52 AM
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority
357  Economy / Economics / Re: Why bitcoin isn't currency. on: December 19, 2013, 04:53:40 AM
Is the community ready to admit that it is not currency?  Grin

Of course not.  Bitcoin is, by definition and design, a currency.  Your arguments are rediculous.

No one can define bitcoin that is the problem.

I can and have.  Your problem is that you won't accept my definition of "currency".

Really what was the definition again? 

A "currency" is a designed medium of exchange, that may or may not be "backed" by a commodity, or may or may not be "backed" as legal tender by some government.  While a money, such as gold, can be minted into coins (and thus also be a currency) a true money is a common commodity that functions as a medium of exchange in a free market, but may not have a 'standard' unit.  By coining that gold into a standard unit, such as a one troy ounce shape with some king's face on it, and declaring it the official money of the realm, a currency is created.  However, the past 100 or so years are proof enough that once a currency is well established and trusted to continue; the original money behind the currency is often no longer necessary.  All fiat currencies are designed by men, whether or not they ever contained (or were otherwise backed by) gold or silver.  Bitcoin is a currency because it was designed (presumedly by one or more human beings) to function as a medium of exchange on the Internet.  Whether or not Bitcoin is a good currency or not is up for debate, and whether or not any particular government agency desires to recognize that Bitcoin is a currency or not is irrelevent; but Bitcoin is a currency regardless.

It is not, however, a true money; because regardless of how useful it is as a medium of exchange, or even as a store of value, Bitcoin never had a pre-existing and non-monetary utility that would have driven it's adoption in a free market as a highly marketable good.

Nor is Bitcoin a fiat currency, because no government institution requires it's use in any context.  Bitcoin is difficult for some to explain, or even wrap their heads around, because it's something new in the realm of exchange mediums.  It's closest to a LETS (Local area Exchange system) wherein the local area is the entire Internet, and that uses triple entry accounting to track exchanges; but it's not a debt based system and the total number of currency units are fixed and known at any given point in time.
358  Economy / Economics / Re: Bitcoin's first major deflation event, and its consequences on: December 19, 2013, 02:13:46 AM
Cool, so we get to keep the increasing value of the currency as opposed to having the central banks siphon the value out of the dollars in my bank account? You feel more comfortable with the idea of your money losing value so you have to spend it right away?

The only reasons I'm not using my bitcoins thus far

A) I'm not being paid in bitcoins

B) Few are accepting them directly.

I'm not converting to fiat and back just to dip into my holdings. As soon as I can just do away with handling fiat and pay my rent in btc I shall do so.

When it takes off with gusto in 2014-2015, then I'll be using them as currency instead of just holding them


And they are not going to start accepting them.. they cant. It is not currency it is an asset but what kind of asset is it? 


An asset is something that generates value to the owner by some other method than speculation.  Bitcoin does not do that, it represents value that can be transfered, but cannot produce new value.  Bitcoin cannot ever be an "asset".

What about as a means of transferring money for less than a bank would charge?

That's savings, not new value, more commonly known as "income".  Of course, unless you're renting it out, real estate doesn't qualify as an 'asset' either; so this is another one of those economic terms that have a bit different common usage.  If you have a mortagage, your home is a 'liability' not an asset.
359  Economy / Economics / Re: Why bitcoin isn't currency. on: December 19, 2013, 12:30:55 AM
Is the community ready to admit that it is not currency?  Grin

Of course not.  Bitcoin is, by definition and design, a currency.  Your arguments are rediculous.

No one can define bitcoin that is the problem.

I can and have.  Your problem is that you won't accept my definition of "currency".
360  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Forum moderation policy on: December 19, 2013, 12:24:07 AM
What actually mean this notice/warning message behind new members? On every languages, with this smile --->   `;)`
`Don't do illegal things, don't make youself problems....`

Is it humor? Or what?

Are every messages dumped to somewhere else? Who monitor us? What government ? FBI? CIA?

Short answer: yes.

Long answer: Yes, all of the above.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 ... 369 »
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!