Bitcoin Forum
June 19, 2021, 03:58:41 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.21.1 [Torrent]
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  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 ... 95 »
1  Economy / Speculation / Re: Is Bitcoin's dominance really about to be challenged? on: July 22, 2014, 11:55:01 AM
Don't forget NXT is a proof of stake coin.

It is not decentralized and has a single point of failure.

Your second phrase doesn't follow as conclusion from the first. Why do you claim it has a central point of failure?

Who control the supply and distribution of NXT coin?

AFAIU it was like MasterCoin, an IPO-like thing. All coins were created in the genesis and distributed proportionally to initial investors. There's no inflation.
2  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: New research proves: MtGox bitcoins NOT stolen using transaction malleability on: March 27, 2014, 11:00:06 AM
My question is, if only 1,811 bitcoins were attacks on Mt Gox, where are the 300,189 others stolen from?

IIRC, once the malleability issue was revealed, some assholes started a DoS with it. They were mutating every transaction that went through them, only to fuck the network. That's probably what accounts for these +300kBTC. They were not stolen.
3  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Swiss parliamentary postulate: Bitcoin is a currency on: December 09, 2013, 07:40:55 PM
... the simplest way to answer them would be to clarify that Bitcoins should be treated like other foreign currencies. ... This not only paves the way for Bitcoin businesses and financial services in Switzerland, it is also a great precedent for other countries that look into how Bitcoin should be handled from a regulatory perspective.

Watch out.
Ok, Bitcoin being defined as "foreign currency" in Switzerland might be interesting, because Switzerland enjoys a good deal of financial freedom (relatively to the rest of the world, at least). AFAIK, people there are free to have bank accounts in foreign currencies, use them as they want etc. But in many (most?) places of the world, such definition would be very negative. In many jurisdictions, foreign currency is something "common folk" can barely touch, and when they're allowed to, regulations are strict. Just take Argentina as an example. Bitcoin being defined as foreign currency there would be almost the equivalent of banning it.
4  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: New paper: Accelerating Bitcoin's Trasaction Processing on: December 08, 2013, 07:26:46 PM
If you are connected to 125 nodes, then for 200 TPS only the hashes already are 0.8 MBps:

Why would you need to be connected to that many full nodes? I don't see the need for so many connections. And SPV nodes only care about the transactions that concern them, which are always a very small set compared to the total that passes by on the network.

At maximum hashes would only need to be 16 8 byte first bits, likely even less.

125 * 8 * 200 = 200000 = 0.2 MBps

Aren't you mixing bytes and bits there? Bps normally means bits per second, not bytes. And 8 bits only for the hashes seems too low. You only get 256 different values, with 200tps you'd have lots of collisions. 8 bytes on the other hand is even more than the poster you replied to was talking about (he mentioned 32 bits, so 4 bytes).
5  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: New paper: Accelerating Bitcoin's Trasaction Processing on: December 06, 2013, 10:51:38 AM
We've got some incredibly naive ideas floating around the Bitcoin space right now - like the idea that just removing the blocksize limit entirely will work out fine - and we need research into scalability solutions that considers incentives and the resulting security carefully. That kind of reasoning tends to involve a lot of math, rather than platitudes about "market forces"

Wow... This presumption of knowledge of yours reminded me of this brilliant quote, perfectly applicable here:

Quote from: Friedrich von Hayek
The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design.

The subjective reasoning of millions can't involve "lots of math", and can't be modeled by it. You can only reach meaningful conclusions through praxeology. And, if you were to actually try that, you'd probably recognize one day that you should not try to impose top-down rulings instead of organic bottom-up organizations, as if people were peons on a chessboard to be manipulated by enlightened "planners". Anyways... that's not the topic here, I don't want to derail this very interesting thread, so I'll stop here. It would be nice if you could also try not to let insults on the air like this every time you can...
6  Economy / Economics / Re: the huge Problem that most people doesn't really understand on: December 05, 2013, 09:02:43 PM
You're going to have to elaborate on why inflation is so evil, more than just calling it "horse shit" and telling me to think about it.

Inflation is evil because it takes purchasing power away from currency holders (and, in general, the poorer you are, the higher the percentage of your savings is based on currency), and gives it to the firsts to receive the newly printed money, namely governments, banks and those well connected to them. But even worse than that, inflation is evil because it creates capital destructive business cycles. All this crisis the world is living now would not have happened if central banks did not have the power to inflate their currencies in order to manipulate interest rates.

Oh, and BTW, the 2% rate you talk about, it's the official estimation on price inflation. The actual monetary inflation is much higher. What means that, if money supply was stable, average prices would decrease. It's not just 2% of purchasing power you lose per year, it's much more, since you'd have to consider how lower would prices be if there was no inflation.
7  Other / Politics & Society / Re: The official "what about the roads?" thread on: November 27, 2013, 01:24:27 PM
The problem is not cutting a switchback in a mountain side, but building superhighways or roads through properties belonging to people who don't want those roads built.  Things don't always scale up easily.

  • Multiple roads.
  • Tunnels.
  • Bridges.
  • Passing around
  • Using secondary identities to buy the land secretly.
  • Buy more than the strictly necessary land and profit from the valuation of adjacent land now better connected.
  • Railroads.
  • Free-market collective transports (cheaper, more frequent).
  • Free-market airports, perhaps built by airlines themselves - there would be many of them.
  • No cumbersome airport regulations nor TSA, speeding up boarding time and bringing the price down. Perhaps planes would become more practical than buses/trains even for not so long distances like 200km or so.
  • Etc etc etc.

As you can see, there are many solutions to the "problem" you raise. And I'm just an ordinary guy, with no particular experience in the field. Imagine what millions of people competing freely would be able to build.
8  Other / Politics & Society / Re: The official "what about the roads?" thread on: November 26, 2013, 10:55:49 PM

Interesting!  A shame they didn't collaborate to ensure the roads would make sense but at least they've proven that roads are built without a central authority.  I wonder if our improved communications will make this a much easier task...

And important to note: they do happen to have a monopoly in charge of building roads, which was simply not doing its job. They handled the situation as they could. Considering it was a poor region when all this started, it's quite impressive!

Very interesting article this one. Thank you for the link, herzmeister.

BTW, Wenzhouneses should be informed about Bitcoin. Something tells me they'll love it! Wink
9  Other / Politics & Society / Re: The official "what about the roads?" thread on: November 26, 2013, 10:28:42 AM
Highways and long distances are the easy part. The tricky part is in towns.

For the "last mile" aspect of most network services - not only roads, but also water supply, sewage, electric wiring etc - probably the easiest way is through contractually shared property, like condos. The condo I live in already owns the "streets" to its parking lots. It could also share the property of adjacent streets. This would not be financed though taxation based on demagogic criteria, but by fees according to your stake in the shared property. I bet condominiums would also look for alternative means of earning money, like charging for parking spots, or eventually the ideas you raised.

Obviously, that's not the only possible solution. Nobody can actually predict what would be the ideal solution. The only thing that is certain is that free-markets will come up with a better arrangement (cost-benefit-wise) than monopolies.
10  Other / Politics & Society / Re: The official "what about the roads?" thread on: November 25, 2013, 04:24:14 PM
Professor Walter Block has already written an entire book on this subject. Its digital version is available for free. Here:
11  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Zerocoin: Anonymous Distributed E-Cash from Bitcoin on: November 17, 2013, 05:43:09 PM
well rather than the get rich quick (...) Now thats not as strong an incentive as make-money-fast pyramid speculation on frankly long-term hopeless me-too alts

Please don't replicate the same silly attacks people tend to use to discredit Bitcoin. The financial incentive behind the technology is what brings lots of the manpower, business and infrastructure it has today. Not to acknowledge that is to be willingly blind.

If there was a technical way to ensure people can get their beta coins converted back into stable coins at the same rate (i.e., pegging), then things could be different. But I don't see how could that be possible.

technically it could be done, (bitcoin could accept coin moving in the other direction) however it imports risk into bitcoin main as a security defect in betacoin that allowed theft or forgery of coins, could then be transferred into bitcoin.

If the defect was only on the betacoin, then the damages would be restrained to those who willingly converted stable coins into beta coins. That's not an issue to me. When you do so, you accept the risks.

Hey, this very feature (allowing the redemption of arbitrary betaCoins built on top of it) could actually be the among the firsts betaCoins. Wink If it works well, it will set up a great platform for experimentation!

Is there an easier explanation somewhere, that could help technical people without a background in cryptography research to grasp the concept?

see earlier in tis thread:

and another few posts after it where I tried to explain it a bit.

Thank you. I've just watched this video following a recommendation of jron, and what I could get from it was the following:

So, let me see if I got the idea: it's possible to accumulate random numbers in such a way that:
  • Prevents observers from knowing which individual numbers were accumulated.
  • Allows the one who knows one particular number to prove he knows it without having to reveal the number itself. Or if you do have to reveal it, it's still impossible to know which particular addition to the accumulator had put that number there, thus creating no link between the addition and the revealing of the number.
Is that a reasonable and sound simplification of the magic behind Zerocoin?

Am I getting closer? Huh
Your explanations kind of hinted me in that direction too.

Thank you!
12  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Zerocoin: Anonymous Distributed E-Cash from Bitcoin on: November 17, 2013, 03:28:41 PM
The betaCoin model is interesting, but I'd just make one import remark though: in this model, there's no financial incentive for people to migrate from bitcoin stable to bitcoin beta, since stable coins will always be more valuable than beta coins. This means that, from a monetary point of view, this beta risks being just a testnet++. Not many people will transfer their coins into it (it is not a reasonable investment strategy), and without much aggregated value, would it really have enough manpower behind it? If Gavin and Garzik are being fully employed to work on Bitcoin right now, it's precisely because bitcoins are valuable to lots of people. If there was a technical way to ensure people can get their beta coins converted back into stable coins at the same rate (i.e., pegging), then things could be different. But I don't see how could that be possible.

Anyways, I came here for another reason. I'm really interested in Zerocoin and I'd like to understand how it works. I can understand the basics of public key cryptography, and blind signature - although the math behind these algorithms are things I simply "trust to be true". Smiley But Zerocoin... damn, is that complicated! I tried reading the paper once it got out, and I couldn't understand a thing.

Is there an easier explanation somewhere, that could help technical people without a background in cryptography research to grasp the concept?

13  Local / Português (Portuguese) / Re: O bitcoin ou A bitcoin? on: November 07, 2013, 03:04:44 PM
O Bitcoin está valorizando rapido.
O Bitcoin é uma revolução tecnologica
A revolução Bitcoin ! (o feminino é "a revolução")
A revolução [do] Bitcoin.
A rede Bitcoin está cada dia maior. <- (feminino é "a rede").
O protocolo Bitcoin é maravilhoso !

Com certeza é "O" !

Uma bitcoin.
Duas bitcoins.
Quantas bitcoins você gastou?

Nesse uso o feminino soa normal pra mim...
14  Local / Português (Portuguese) / Re: O bitcoin ou A bitcoin? on: November 06, 2013, 04:41:02 PM
Normalmente eu digo uma/duas bitcoins. Mas quando falo do sistema uso o masculino, e se me lembrar, letra maiúscula, pois é um nome próprio: o [sistema] Bitcoin.

Dólar e Euro tambem são estrangeirismos que não têm género, mas no entanto diz-se: "A moeda/divisa (com o nome) Dólar/Euro" e "O Dólar/Euro". Portanto: "A moeda/divisa (com o nome) Bitcoin" e "O Bitcoin".
Vocês gostam de complicar, não gostam?

É... tem razão. Um dólar, um euro, um real, um cruzeiro etc... praticamente todas as unidades de moedas são masculinas. A não ser coisas como uma coroa sueca/tcheca etc.
15  Economy / Speculation / Re: Parity watch -> El Salvador on: November 05, 2013, 08:23:25 PM
There must be an M1 for Bitcoin. It's just that nobody knows what it is ;-)

I wouldn't be that sure. I don't think there's any entity practicing fractional reserves with bitcoin right now. You can't even have serious loans quoted in bitcoins, due to the volatility. But well, who knows...
16  Economy / Speculation / Re: Parity watch -> El Salvador on: November 05, 2013, 03:49:20 PM
This guy is definitely saying that Bitcoin money supply (market cap) should be compared with "monetary base" (MB or M0) ...

I've been saying this for a while too. But I haven't seen any list of all currencies' M0s so far.

I don't think it hugely matters. The fractional reserve lending component in the BTC economy must be fairly trivial, so the Bitcoin M1 is unlikely to be much larger than the Bitcoin M0.

It doesn't matter because the whole comparison is just for fun anyway. Smiley

But the metric that is being used on the bitcoin side (all bitcoins issued) is its monetary base, its M0. And the metric that's being used on the other side is the M1 of fiat currencies. IMHO it would be more accurate to use M0 on both sides, since there's no M1 for Bitcoin.
17  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Competition in the Emergency Room Marketplace? on: November 05, 2013, 03:44:40 PM
"Bad" emergency hospitals would eventually be blacklisted by medical insurances. Your ambulance would probably work to/with your medical insurance, and would not take you to the blacklisted hospitals. Or at least avoid it if possible. That would of course create a strong incentive for hospitals not to be blacklisted, since being blacklisted by most insurances could drive them to bankruptcy. And that would ensure "bad hospitals" to be rare and of quick living.

By the way, the assumption that you always have to go to the nearest hospital is exaggerated.

Under these circumstances, there can't be a market solution.

He, it's funny how fast people conclude what they want to conclude. It took me only a couple minutes to come up with the answer above. And I'm just one random guy. How dare you say millions of people working freely wouldn't be able to come up with a much better solution that we cannot even imagine today?
It really looks like what people against slavery abolition in the 19th century would say: "But who would do the hard work? Agriculture would collapse! We would all starve! Do you want to live in a society where people starve to death?"
18  Bitcoin / Legal / Re: Good news regarding Bitcoin and VAT in Sweden on: November 05, 2013, 11:38:44 AM
Apparently Skatteverket ("the tax authorities", "IRS") has appealed the decision

Do you know what exactly are they appealing for?
It is to be able to tax commissions earned by exchanges as if it was a taxable service, or is it because they want bitcoins units themselves to be subject to VAT like a consumption good?
The former would be bad, but well, it's just the same think for every kind of service. But the latter is much more catastrophic.
19  Bitcoin / Hardware wallets / Re: [PREORDER] Trezor: Bitcoin hardware wallet on: October 30, 2013, 10:43:25 AM
If you set it to a more compatible mode and accept both, the malware could simply strip the payment protocol and pretend the merchant doesn't support it and request that you pay using the plain old Bitcoin protocol.

Hey, that's an interesting question, not really related to Trezor but to the payment protocol itself.

If you request a https page and receive a http one, your browser can clearly detect something's not right.

But how does that work with PaymentRequests? AFAIK they're pushed by the payee, not requested by the payer, right? What if a malware sees that an authenticated payment request is passing by, and simply replace it by an non-authenticated one? If you know the merchant is supposed to send you an authenticated payment request, you'll realize there's something wrong. But can we really expect people to understand this?
20  Economy / Economics / Re: the effects of fractional reserve on bitcoins value on: October 29, 2013, 10:08:19 PM
That's going by your definition of the free market, where assassinations "don't belong."  They do if there's any demand and any supply.

No, they don't. It's only a free market if property rights are respected. Assassination - and governments - by definition does not respect them, so it's an antithesis to free markets. Regardless of supply and demand. Do no confuse "free markets" with just "markets" or even "economic laws" (like the fact that supply and demand determine prices). Economic laws are inexorable and thus, of course, apply to all sort human actions, including those which do not respect property rights, like assassination, slavery. theft and everything else government/mafias do.

But that's another topic Smiley

Finally, it's a bit odd that everyone is so eager to change topics away from fractional reserve banking -- the subject of both the post you are replying to & the title of this thread. 

It's just that....


Sorry for the off-topic.
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 ... 95 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!