It's a completely different system at play here so I don't think we can apply those laws.

Plus, it's a voluntary act. Using Bitcoin that is.

They would care if they could buy 10 times as much food with Bitcoin over the next month when compared with holding Pesos.

What? Why not?

That seems like it would be the perfect thing to do? Why would you hold a hyperinflating currency?

Woah, you must not have been paying too much attention to Ripple back then.

Tradefortress was actually the biggest Ripple detractor by far. He paid people many BTC to edit their posts if they were on the first page of Ripple's giveaway thread to say something along the lines of "RIPPLE IS A SCAM" ect ect. Also paid people to put that in their sigs.

And he also ran a literal scam where he issued 'Tradefortress' BTC backed by nothing on Ripple where at least one person lost 1 BTC.

That being said I totally don't blame you for completely ignoring all that nonsense that went on during that time.

Wow, is it really that bad already?!

That does not sound fun at all. I hope enough people there hear about Bitcoin before it's too late.

Well winning them via a trivia/quiz bot would count as earning I think. And giving some away to new users would fall under the enabling usage category I think.

Sounds fair to me.

I agree that it's risky.

I suggest making the slider a minimum of 5% as was the original intention.

I do like the idea that people can contribute more than 5% though.

No, because 0 conf transactions are susceptible to a whole other category of double spend attacks. (Race attacks, Finney attacks ect.)

And yes, the use case is when 1 confirmation is considered acceptable. Which is the case in a very large amount of transactions.

There are lots of transactions that are going to be fine on 0 confirmations. But I've waited countless times up to an hour for many transactions to complete that only require one confirmation.

I think you're wrong. These things are supposed to function as currencies. For someone who considers one confirmation sufficient for a regular sized transaction a short block time is much, much better than the incredibly slow configuration of Bitcoin. Waiting 40 minutes or even an hour for a confirmation is not acceptable when there are faster alternatives.

Yes, if you're buying a house you might still want to wait the same total amount of time to feel 100% secure against double spends. And yes, hashes will be wasted and blocks will be orphaned. But these things are supposed to be currencies. Currencies that are used every day to buy groceries, and pay your internet bill. One confirmation is sufficient for any transaction that's not large enough that you'll want to take extra measures.

Did you wait for the blockchain to fully download?

Great to see continued support of the Bitmark Foundation.

Yes, I think we all know that it's in all of our best interests to do whatever we can to keep Mark working full time on Bitmark. It's a huge project with a bright future. Right now we're getting an amazing developer working non stop all day everyday for close to free. In San Francisco he could walk in the door somewhere and start out with a minimum of 120k per year(likely much more).

A lot of coins do presales or IPO's to raise funds, but Mark doesn't believe in doing it that way so he's decided rely on the community instead of premining a bunch of BTM for himself. A lot of community members have been very generous so far and I hope that everyone at least considers how much value we gain by having Mark working on Bitmark and getMarked.

There are some new people in the community now and there will be even more shortly. So I wanted to make sure everyone is clear that this is a donation driven project that intends to have a fully sustained Bitmark Foundation with multiple developers one year from now. In the mean time to get us to that point anyone that is interested in seeing Bitmark become what we all want it to become, I'd ask you to consider supporting the development effort. Which right now is just Mark doing it all single handedly, full time, with a family.

Here is the funding BTC address: 18rai2ichzUfXG6PVmUQLNPqBjtctnVRAD   (or better yet check it on the first page of this post since you shouldn't trust someone else posting a BTC address on behalf of someone else )

Wow, that's a really good post and idea. This is a really good way to distribute stake and should solve a lot of the problems mentioned in the post.

Incentives are key and I think you guys might have nailed it here.

For regular people and real world daily use shorter block times are superior, no question about it.

If you're not comfortable making a regular size transaction on one confirmation then there are bigger problems at play.

Yes, some hash will be wasted. So the question is, what is a more important attribute for a currency? Ease of use or most efficient use of hash?

Looks good to me. Seems to have everything we need right now.

Yeah, it seems to be a completely different situation. I don't think this particular crisis could have the same obvious upside for BTC that the Cyprus crisis had.

I always just get the coffee of the day. It's usually pretty good. Mochachino is alright too if I'm in the mood for something sweet.

Would this be the first time that Bitshares is cloned?

Bitshares is a pretty big deal. If this can be done it would be very interesting.

I guess it depends on whether you define 'bubble' as something that inflates then pops and dies after or just the rapid run up followed by a big drop ignoring whether the asset survives after.

A lot of people use 'bubble' to describe the big bitcoin run ups, so I do as well. Also, people like to call the mid 2000s housing price surge a 'bubble', and it's not like the housing market in the US is ever going to completely die.