The attorneys are not the ones who make the decision on taking action against someone infringing on their trademark.
Company lawyers often work without consultation, especially in a big company. I think, the higher ups in an international company have better things to do, than to decide, if they should sue some small fry. |
|
|
|
Thinking this very much too - and considering just how much positive the growth of fundamentals has seemed over the past year, I'm very much looking forward to the adjustment.
In the last half year, the use of Bitcoin hasn't changed much. See Estimated transaction volume in USD, which has been flat for six months now. There's been a lot of talk about growth in usage, but it's not happening. If you want to know the usage, why do you see the volume in USD? That chart shows how many wealth in moving. The number of transactions should be a better meassure of dinamism. https://blockchain.info/es/charts/n-transactionsUSD volume represents the value of the transactions. The number of transactions means little--if you buy something from me for $100, I don't care if you hand me a $100 bill once, or hand me $10 bill ten times. Why would you make more than one transaction for a purchase? The values might come from different addresses, which resembles you metaphor of 10 10$ bills. |
|
|
|
Value would increase? With a sudden cap on "incoming" currency, I think the economic value would substantially increase.
lol. price would fall since those miners would get coins much cheaper then right now and bitcoin would become more vulnerable to get attacked. But since would be worth less, would be also less profit for the attackers. No, they wouldn't unless the difficulty changes, which could take months. |
|
|
|
I highly doubt this. He took care about his privacy and things, this would be a mistake. Also people (including me) have a ton of ideas. This is some coincidence. I don't think that satoshi would have talked about his idea prior to his whitepaper.
There we go. Do you really believe, that he never talked to anybody about it before he created his pseudo-identity? That is pretty unlikely. |
|
|
|
To me that's only a couple of a percent chance of being personally affected if you happened to be transferring coin at the time of the attack. Then when it's noticed happening, we point dual Gavins at it and pull the trigger, 48 hour fix even if attacker paid someone to get them drunk at a conference the night before.
Yes, but Bitcoin will be permanently damaged by by removing the trust we have in the system from such an attack. and it's ONLY when a large amount of resources and planning has been achieved that you can possibly do anything else, at which point everybody is watching you like a hawk. With POS, it seems more like you can 5th column it gradually.
Again you seem to be ignoring that a disgruntled employee or outside hacker attacking a large mining pool without a large amount of resources can attack the network. You seem to be focusing on PoS as well which isn't exactly what the paper is talking about. People use the term "attack the network" a lot. Could you give examples, of what can really happen? What do these attacks look like? What damage can these "attacks" really do? Any successful attack would erode confidence in the network and would cause people to not want to hold/use any coins that are backed by the network. As a result the value of such coin would decline (like to nearly zero). A likely attack would involve spending the same coins multiple times, resulting in all of the people who thought they received money to actually not receive money. So, the real threat to Bitcoin is not on the technical site, but on the PR-site. If that would be true, shouldn't we fear more about people bad-mouthing bitcoin? Oh wait, they already do and Bitcoin is still alive, although people believe that the CEO of bitcoin if a magical tux or that bitcoin was already hacked, etc. |
|
|
|
That's amazing. It could really be him. Maybe just his first thoughts on the subject he made public. FOr some reasons I don't think it's him :p and let's say it's him , did Bitcoin took him over 7 years to develop it ?  (guessing that he started in 2002) I don't think, he would work 7 years on it fulltime. That is just a misconception on how an idea develops. He might have gathered some information on the topic, than forget about it for a year or 2 started thinking about it again, maybe even write some lines of code. Throw them away, have some personal stuff he has to take care of, has stress with his job, randomly found something that he could use, work on the code again, throw it away, and so on ... After all, who ever Satoshi is, he has a live besides Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
everything except the thing that matters
Can people like you please just play at a casino or something similar and leave bitcoin alone? |
|
|
|
A currency is anything that people place value on, over the what it truly is. The Native Americans used to use beads as a currency... now ISIS uses Women as currency... There is no end to what we can use as a currency.
They do? Can I exchange my girl friend for a younger one, like I can exchange an old banknote for a new one at the bank? |
|
|
|
Value would increase? With a sudden cap on "incoming" currency, I think the economic value would substantially increase.
I don't think so, since it would be bad PR for Bitcoins. Transaction would take longer to confirm, which would really hurt. But the difficulty is adjusted every two weeks, so the effect on the network would be gone after that period, but still bad PR. |
|
|
|
Here's the story behind this. I posted the picture on my large bitcoin facebook page. www.facebook.com/BITCOlNTwo days after posting, I received an email from facebook saying that Western Union Holdings, Inc filed a DMCA claim against me, citing their ownership of the Western Union *trademark* (strangely, not their copyright on the ad), and that Facebook decided to remove the content. I went ahead and filed a counter-claim, where I had to swear that I believe Facebook wrongfully granted their takedown request. Now, Western Union has 10 days to either file a federal court order, or Facebook will reinstate the image. I see it as a win/win situation. If western Union actually sues me for posting the image, it will come back to bite them 1000x over in negative PR alone. Plus, I'm not the original content creator, and the image should be legally protected as "comparative advertising". I would be very careful. I am not sure, about US-Laws, but something like that, can end in a hefty fine for you. Don't take a unnecessary risk until you have at least talked to a lawyer. Don't take posts on this forum as legal advise. |
|
|
|
To me that's only a couple of a percent chance of being personally affected if you happened to be transferring coin at the time of the attack. Then when it's noticed happening, we point dual Gavins at it and pull the trigger, 48 hour fix even if attacker paid someone to get them drunk at a conference the night before.
Yes, but Bitcoin will be permanently damaged by by removing the trust we have in the system from such an attack. and it's ONLY when a large amount of resources and planning has been achieved that you can possibly do anything else, at which point everybody is watching you like a hawk. With POS, it seems more like you can 5th column it gradually.
Again you seem to be ignoring that a disgruntled employee or outside hacker attacking a large mining pool without a large amount of resources can attack the network. You seem to be focusing on PoS as well which isn't exactly what the paper is talking about. People use the term "attack the network" a lot. Could you give examples, of what can really happen? What do these attacks look like? What damage can these "attacks" really do? |
|
|
|
How the heck does one send BTC using a textmessage?! I have used apps on my smartphone but never text messages. You could send the transaction via SMS to a service, that sends it to the blockchain. Not sure, how you would create such a transaction ... |
|
|
|
I don't use to open discussions here because all my questions have already been answered somewhere in this forum however I cannot understand what is going on in these days with the bitcoin price. Let me explain myself:
It is clear for me that in this year (2014) we are a lot better than years before. We can buy directly with bitcoins in overstock and paypal has "integrated" bitcoin in its payment system. I also saw a browser extension that allow us to buy in amazon (there is a middleman).
Without MtGox and after the 2013's bubble the ecosystem looks healthier than before.
There weren't bad news in 2014, no more repetitive-fear-generator SilkRoad / drugs / isis / satan news. In fact there were more good news thanks to new projects/startups.
I think that in this atmosphere the bitcoin's price shouldn't go down. What is going on? Do you know?
It's often discussed. The simple answer is, that the price is low due to price manipulation. Speculators can just make more money with high volatility and that is mostly what all the exchanges are about: Making money with speculation. That is exactly the reason, why so many people don't look at the price anymore. If you look at other metrics you see, that the BTC-economy is growing. |
|
|
|
Interessant. Warum man aber einen Kraken-Account braucht, erschließt sich mir nicht(ich hab zwar schon einen aber für andere ist das wohl eher nicht so toll) |
|
|
|
|
I'd say, I am pretty much at peace with Bitcoins.
I have a lot of confidence now, that it will be a success. I saw it at some highly speculative thing a year or even some months ago and wasn't sure, if I would just lose the money, I invested in it.
I look at the price changes every day, but it doesn't really excite me anymore, regardless of if it going up or down.
|
|
|
|
I hope people notice the income is in HKD. $100,000 USD is more than most US citizens make, $100,000 HKD = ~12,887 USD, which is considered impoverished in most of the US. That having been said, in theory, most US respondents would be in the "top" income group of this survey.
I just realized, that I gave a wrong answer there. I didn't consider, that here in Austria we get our monthly pay 14 times(fixed bonus for summer and x-mas). It is better to ask for the yearly income. |
|
|
|
If there is mass acceptance, dumps won't be necessary. He won't need fiat. A lot of people don't seem to understand that if Bitcoin is successful it will be the money - currency trading as an industry and occupation won't exist any more because there won't be other currencies to exchange. That is just idealistic bullshit. Bitcoin can take a major part in the world without destroying fiat completely. There can also be other cryptocurrencies besides bitcoin. Bitcoin will definitely never be the only money on earth. , unless it's by force. Let's imagine bitcoin is accepted everywhere, what possible reason would you have to accept anything else? Perhaps a different coin is more anonymous or has some technical feature. But bitcoin could probably copy those features. And there's always off-chain transactions (which still use bitcoin as the unit of account). I don't necessarily think everyone's coffee purchases will be on the blockchain, but could see all the prices being in bitcoin. Some months ago, I met a friend of mine, since he was in my city. He was there, because he had to deliver some blue prints and a 3D-model to a architecture-competition. I asked him, why he couldn't just send them over the internet and he gave me a lot of stupid reasons like the line width of the blue prints depend on the printer or that it has to be a closed letter so nobody else can see it, yada, yada, yada. I wasn't able to convince him, that all this things could be guaranteed by sending it over the internet if just somebody took the time to implement something like that. So, that is the reason, why fiat will not disappear. It is never just about, what the best solution is. It is also about what ignorant people understand and what they are willing to change. This analogy doesn't hold with currency. A 3d model still works equally well even if no one else in the world still uses them. Fiat currency that no one else uses anymore, is literally worthless, no matter how tenaciously the last holdouts cling to it. Yes, if no one uses a currency it disappears. That is called circular logic and is worthless. |
|
|
|
If there is mass acceptance, dumps won't be necessary. He won't need fiat. A lot of people don't seem to understand that if Bitcoin is successful it will be the money - currency trading as an industry and occupation won't exist any more because there won't be other currencies to exchange. That is just idealistic bullshit. Bitcoin can take a major part in the world without destroying fiat completely. There can also be other cryptocurrencies besides bitcoin. Bitcoin will definitely never be the only money on earth. , unless it's by force. Let's imagine bitcoin is accepted everywhere, what possible reason would you have to accept anything else? Perhaps a different coin is more anonymous or has some technical feature. But bitcoin could probably copy those features. And there's always off-chain transactions (which still use bitcoin as the unit of account). I don't necessarily think everyone's coffee purchases will be on the blockchain, but could see all the prices being in bitcoin. Some months ago, I met a friend of mine, since he was in my city. He was there, because he had to deliver some blue prints and a 3D-model to a architecture-competition. I asked him, why he couldn't just send them over the internet and he gave me a lot of stupid reasons like the line width of the blue prints depend on the printer or that it has to be a closed letter so nobody else can see it, yada, yada, yada. I wasn't able to convince him, that all this things could be guaranteed by sending it over the internet if just somebody took the time to implement something like that. So, that is the reason, why fiat will not disappear. It is never just about, what the best solution is. It is also about what ignorant people understand and what they are willing to change. |
|
|
|
Hello Guys, I'm a student studying in Accounting from Hongkong. Recently, i'm writing a dissertation about Bitcoin regulation. In order to understand the opinions regarding to "Bitcoin" regulation between different kinds of people, i'm doing a survey as below. I 'm really really seeking your help~ Please Help me... Embarrassed Embarrassed Embarrassed Embarrassed Embarrassed It just spend around 5 mins. https://docs.google.com/forms/d/13kfTXfhm2xJBubFQFNZatgL8KhdmmkPApGMD4AplVts/viewform?usp=send_formdone will you share your results with us? |
|
|
|
When everybody tries to manipulate everyone else, it evens out.
That is not a good way to look at something. That would work, if the forces who are working against each other are equivalent in strength and that is just stupid to assume. Right, ok, let me try another angle: If someone is to forcibly stop everyone else (but not themselves) to try to manipulate, it is even worse. But you know, the market can handle it. If you can't - stay away (i.e. hold). They are not exactly sending tanks against each other. There is one side, who wants the price to go down, there is another side who wants the price to go up. They are not all working against each other trying to reach thousand of different goals. Someone might be your ally today and your enemy tomorrow. "The market can handle it", is just a stupid statement, that means nothing. If someone would drop some atomic bombs on the USA, "the market" could also handle that. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
