Bitcoin Forum
June 15, 2021, 12:33:56 AM *
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 »
1  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Evil Jews regime using money trap to scare Americans on: July 23, 2013, 02:04:49 PM
What does the jewish ethnic group has to do with this? you got no one else to blame?

Lizard People get the day off today.
2  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: What stops short forks from taking up everyone's disk space? on: June 30, 2013, 12:16:11 AM
Why do you need to keep them?  The only reason a fork could return is if someone thought it was the best chain and kept working on it.  This means they would have all of this information, which should be retrievable.    You need to catch up anyway if you disconnect from the network and return in an hour, this seems like it would be the same case.  You keep track of what you think is the best chain, if someone gives you evidence of a better one, you replace what you know with what they give you.
3  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: [ANNOUNCE] Micro-payment channels implementation now in bitcoinj on: June 30, 2013, 12:11:34 AM
How do you avoid transaction malleability?

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_Malleability

Does this not mean that even if you have a signed refund transaction, it is possible for the funding transaction to be changed, such that the refund transaction is now invalid?

Or is this just not a concern?

good point. While I'm slightly surprised to read about transaction signing not covering the whole transaction which sounds like a huge design flaw now, changing the hash sounds spooky to me, too.

It seems like it's something that is not likely to be a huge deal and you can only be spite exploited by it.  Say your funding transaction gets modified for some reason and that changes its hash- it's not like the server can spend it all.  It just makes your refund transaction invalid.  So the money is stuck in a joint account until a new refund is created.  The server could just laugh at you and you'd be out the money, but it doesn't seem like they get any real benefit out of it.  They could hold it hostage in a malicious case, where they refuse to sign a new transaction unless you give them half or something similar, but that would wreck their reputation and likely you would prefer to have smaller transactions to the server anyway, and if it fills up, send another one.

Malleability of transactions seems annoying to me and prevents a lot of pure trust-less applications from being rock solid. 

The poker application did sound interesting.  However, I'm not sure it's practical to do this - any time the table composition changes, you need to have some kind of new funding transaction and finalize a refund to that player.  The shared wallet would change due to different public keys, meaning you pretty much need to start from scratch every few minutes whenever someone leaves or joins (which can happen often in cash games).  I suppose you could have a system where a central server that runs the game just sets up separate channels for each player.  Whenever that person makes a bet, money is removed from the refund.  You'd also likely have a "bank" that has another input (refund transaction takes an input from the player and one from the house, and the one from the house would have to equal the amount money each player has on the table up to what the player has).  Whenever a player wins a hand, he gets money put into his account, and whenever he bets, it gets removed.  Transactions are updated, and timestamped, and when he leaves the table, the transaction is finalized.  This requires a significant amount of money for the server to put up, which seems suboptimal, but at least better than the alternative of having to keep submitting a transaction any time someone joins or leaves a table.  I'm not sure this solves a problem better than having a site that just holds money for you.  Then again, with hacking issues of some sites and seizure issues, this might be safer.
4  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: [ANNOUNCE] Micro-payment channels implementation now in bitcoinj on: June 29, 2013, 08:35:56 PM
How do you avoid transaction malleability?

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_Malleability

Does this not mean that even if you have a signed refund transaction, it is possible for the funding transaction to be changed, such that the refund transaction is now invalid?

Or is this just not a concern?
5  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Contracts on: April 30, 2013, 07:13:14 PM
If you wanted to prevent the grandfather from spending the coins before the 18th birthday, you would use multisig.

Grandfather would pay into a multisig with his pubKey and his grandson's pubKey.  Then grandfather could make the same locked spend from the multisig, which would become valid when the grandson was 18.  The grandson would also sign with his key and broadcast when he's 18.

Forgive me because I'm still pretty new in raw transactions and how they work, so I'm a bit lost with that explanation.  I'll try to re-explain it in my own words and if I make a mistake, let me know.

First a transaction is created that requires both the grandfathers and grandsons private keys to spend.  Once that transaction is broadcast, then the grandfather signs a new transaction that has a time lock on it of the grandsons 18th birthday.  This transaction isn't broadcast.  The grandfather hands the transaction to his grandson, who can sign it on his 18th birthday and he is guaranteed that the grandfather hasn't spent the money yet, since he never signed the money away.  Once his birthday hits, he signs it, and proves he now owns the coins, and they are his, and he can get the transaction into the blockchain.

Is this correct?

Personally, I am more interested in the other case (I'm not sure if both have to be combined) for it to work - the death condition.  But it sounds like something similar could happen.  A new tx is created that requires 2 people to spend out of.  The transaction would require a 3rd party to sign the transaction for it to be accepted at that time.  In particular, I'm interested in an escrow-like use case, where the address of the output changes based on an external state (oracle).  One transaction to set up the multisig, then another transaction to allow either to cash in once the oracle decides it can be cashed in?
6  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Contracts on: April 30, 2013, 05:32:26 PM
I had this same question.  If the transaction is never broadcast, then surely he can spend his coins, then the transaction is invalid when the grandson tries to cash it in.  If he broadcasts it right away, then it must somehow be revoked or modified for the death claim to work.  Is this understanding correct?  But that would still create a small window where the old tx is modified and the new contract added, leaving a chance for a spend in that time.  My understanding of txs is still very rudimentary, so I feel like I must be missing an important piece of this.
7  Economy / Speculation / Re: Actually btc is going down because... on: September 06, 2011, 08:26:23 PM
this is why it's down... period.  end of discussion.

http://www.flexcoin.com/calc

It's just pure economics.. nothing more.  nothing less.


"This number is the absolute fact of what is needed to be added to the bitcoin community in order to keep prices stable. This number can be a mixture of dollars, yen, euros, gold, silver or whatever currency of choice. It can also be the dollar value of services and products being bought for bitcoins (not just offered) but the total dollar figure MUST equal the amount listed above."

I know its a fact that 216,000 new bitcoins are minted each month, but I dont see that it necessarily correlates with the price. You are assuming that 216,000 new bitcoins are being sold each month. If a miner is minting these coins and simply holding them because he believes they will be worth more in the future, then they would not in any way effect the current exchange rate. I do not know how many miners are holding their coins for the future, and how many miners are dumping their coins on the exchanges.

If he mines them and holds them, he is effectively buying then since there are costs to acquiring and he is passing up the opportunity to sell them.
8  Economy / Speculation / Re: BTC price collapse! on: August 04, 2011, 01:58:24 AM
Panic selling from irrational people. Buy them while they're cheap Smiley

This only works if you can find someone to sell them to at a higher price, or buy something useful with them.

The irrational people are the ones who expected this to hit $1000.  They didn't realize that it was just a few rational people riding it up, and were rational enough to get out once the new money stopped coming in.

I can always buy something useful with bitcoins. There are plenty of merchants out there. Smiley

As for $1000, I don't expect to see that anytime before 2020. Though I could be wrong.

Can you buy something useful cheaper (or more useful) by using Bitcoins (if the value is dropping)?  If no, then you are doing it wrong.
9  Economy / Speculation / Re: BTC price collapse! on: August 03, 2011, 08:53:10 PM
Panic selling from irrational people. Buy them while they're cheap Smiley

This only works if you can find someone to sell them to at a higher price, or buy something useful with them.

The irrational people are the ones who expected this to hit $1000.  They didn't realize that it was just a few rational people riding it up, and were rational enough to get out once the new money stopped coming in.
10  Economy / Speculation / Re: BTC price will hit 5$ this week on: August 03, 2011, 02:42:12 PM
How many thousands of buy orders are on books @$5 or greater?  100k? 200k?

The better question is how many would still be there if the price dropped to $5.
11  Economy / Speculation / Re: No more free trades on: July 28, 2011, 03:49:28 PM
Yeah because sellers don't have the option to increase their price to compensate for the fees Roll Eyes

You should stick to qualifying absolutes, that usually always works out well for you.


But the buyers will lower their prices to compensate for the fees, so who wins?
12  Economy / Economics / Re: Speculators, speak up. on: July 13, 2011, 04:07:47 PM
I like a different philosophy.

I consider Bitcoins a high risk/high reward type of investment.  Every so often, I'll adjust my investments.  I don't want to have a huge percentage of my portfolio in such investments.  So if Bitcoin goes up a bunch, sell some to keep my risk level low and get some profits.  The more I make, the more I can afford to keep in risky investments, so I don't sell as much each time.
13  Economy / Economics / Re: Tobin Tax. Anyone want to help me build the Tobin Tax website? on: July 08, 2011, 06:26:05 PM
Trading pokemon cards shouldn't constitute a contribution to "society".

Two people exchanging Pokeman cards are maximizing their utility, benefiting from the exchange.  This results in a betterment for society as 2 people gained something at the expense of nobody else.


Everybody is not entitled to benefits from a transaction. 

How you figure?  Can you give me an example of two people involved in a 'transaction' in which one (or more) parties do not benefit?  I think theft would be a good example, but can you think of anything else?

I think that an apple looks delicious.  I buy it from a vendor.  He benefits.  Turns out the apple is rotten.  The vendor did not know it.  I do not benefit.
14  Economy / Economics / Re: Dear miners you need to sell 10% of your BTC income on: July 08, 2011, 03:27:08 PM
this is good for my plan to kill incentive to join btc mining but .... looking at this from the opposite point of view

ppl got a perception is a problem ? if you spend 1000 on a rig that rig is not gone, the value over time of said rig can go lower but the value dint drop to 0, rushing like mad to replace the 1000 from that wallet that got invested on a rig is stupid, any inversion that give you over 20% return per year is a good move, so if get 333 back in the first year (yay 33,3%)  you can pad yourself for doing a good move

rushing to get back the 1000 spend in first 3/4 months will decrease the price because the marker is flooded, dont we know that on many places tomatoes, apples, milk, bread, etc go to the garbege so they dont flood the market, even clothes that are from the older seasons get destroyed and then trashed so the demand for clothes dont get lower by getting cloth from trash.


 

333 back, but you need to account for depreciation of your assets.  33% on an investment that depreciates 100% the first year is not a good investment.  On one that depreciates 5%, it's quite good.
15  Economy / Economics / Re: What creates this price for a bitcoin? on: July 08, 2011, 03:25:48 PM
I guess it is just the price change then that messes it up for me, to where its not a bitcoin is worth a bitcoin like a dollar is worth a dollar.  I know for so long ya know I can buy a candybar for a dollar, and probably get some change back depending on if its 1990 or 2011 but still pretty damn close, where months ago a bitcoin was nothing, then it was worth 30 bux, then hit 9 bux, then 12, now 15, stablizing in the 12 to 15 range now so its just a bitcoin can not buy the same thing today as it can say tomorrow or next week.  Thats the part that messes me up I guess, is how quick the value is changing daily.

This is a speculative market that is thinly traded.  Things tend to bounce around a lot.  This is common with a lot of speculative assets that don't have much liquidity.

Not only is Bitcoin being priced based on how much people want to use it today, but on how much people might want to use it in the future.  No one knows the future, and the past is quite short, so a lot of people are betting in lots of different ways.  If you think Bitcoin becomes in 10 years huge 1% of the time, a moderate failure 95%, and a complete failure 4%, it still might make sense to buy them at $15 each.  Some people have shorter terms they want to look at, and even then it has to be based on what people will think in the future.  There is lots of uncertainty.  There are lots of people who didn't even know what a Bitcoin was a year ago.  There are also lots of amateurs who have never invested in anything before, but now find themselves in possession of something that could be worth as much as a house.  They don't know what they are doing and will screw up a lot too.

Then there is the criminal element with scams, thieves, and other attacks on the network.  All of those play a big factor.

So the price is fluctuating.  Eventually, information will give us a price that accounts for all of such things.  As new information comes out, that price may change, but there are enough incentives in place that will eventually keep it from changing too drastically too fast unless something catastrophic happens.  I wish I could tell you what that price would be, if so, I could be rich.
16  Economy / Economics / Re: Tobin Tax. Anyone want to help me build the Tobin Tax website? on: July 07, 2011, 09:44:30 PM
I refuse to take the word of someone who has the traitor Alexander Hamilton as their avatar.

-SOCRATES
Isn't the alternative left us to persuade you that you should let us go?

-POLEMARCHUS
Could you persuade us if we don't listen?

I'm apprehensive that you won't listen but just in case:

That shows how much you know about the history of the place you live.  I've seen all the Alex Jones, Zeitgeist, and other 'fringe' documentaries out there as well.  I do like Ron Paul.  If you have evidence that one the greatest founders of our country was a 'traitor' please post it here.

Is it that you equate the 1st bank (and therefore 2nd bank) of the United States as past incarnations of the Federal Reserve?  If so, please do more research on the topic.  I thought the same many years ago until I found out that while they are both central banks that is where the similarities end; and the reasons that you think the 1st bank was allowed to expire and the 2nd bank was 'slain' by Andrew Jackson are far from the reasons that you think they were.


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

If there's one person to go back in time to murder, it wouldn't be Hitler or Pol Pot, it would be Hamilton.
17  Economy / Economics / Re: Tobin Tax. Anyone want to help me build the Tobin Tax website? on: July 07, 2011, 07:58:47 PM


Did you read any articles related to hyper trading?  Comments like this clearly illustrate that you didn't.  Please do so.  You'll benefit from the process.

The problem is that they are doing these 0.00005% profit trades every micro-second and using those trades and false bids, etc to manipulate the price.  Point being is that while their profit from each trade might be this low the total market manipulation is much greater.  Please research this more.  It's not some benign force mildly inconveniencing you it is a much greater problem than that.

I didn't see any links given.  I don't plan on reading anything long.  It should be simple enough to explain or give a short summary.

You use a lot of loaded terms-

Why do I care if someone is making a lot of small trades making a small amount of money?
Why do I care if someone makes false bids?  If the bid would be honored if someone gets their order in before it's canceled, it's not a false bid.

"Manipulating the price" - such a loaded term.  Again, don't care.  Someone foolish enough to be manipulated because someone puts bids in or buys and sells at different prices deserves any losses.  Moving money from idiots to non-idiots is good for society.

I'm not going to waste time researching something unless I have a good reason to.  Try to give it to me.  I'm willing to listen.  Why should I care someone is making lots of trades?

Until then- "Oh noes, someone be making profits by providing me liquidity!"

I refuse to take the word of someone who has the traitor Alexander Hamilton as their avatar.
18  Economy / Economics / Re: Tobin Tax. Anyone want to help me build the Tobin Tax website? on: July 07, 2011, 07:05:49 PM
I'd love for someone to tell my why speculation is bad.

I sense a thread derail coming, but yeah I don't see why speculation is so bad.

Apparently that's because both of you aren't aware of how much of it is going on, at least I hope that is the answer.  Before I write a 10 page history on this I'll test the waters: do you think that there is any amount of speculation that would be 'too much' or is it fine to have 50 times GDP of a country flowing in and out of that countries capital markets annually?


No, I don't think there is the concept of "too much".  Maybe you can explain why.  Even just a short summary.

I don't know if the Tobin tax is a good idea but the problem it addresses is huge.

When you try to buy or sell securities, hypertrading is a way that allows the big players to find the maximum price you are willing to pay.  They do it by placing and cancelling sales 1000s of times per second when a new buy order appears.  The effect is that us peons always pay close to the max we are willing to pay while the Goldman Sachs type institutions pocket the difference between that max and the price the security could be acquired at.

Its thought that transaction tax to eliminate those trades would be helpful.  If it provided a buffer for the "too big to fail" banks, so much the better.

Personally I'd worry that the exchange would simply take place somewhere else.  I don't know if the tax would work.



So the problem is someone else makes money?  Oh noes, how horrible.  I pay what I am willing to pay, how horrible.

Problem is that someone else is making money off of you without you getting anything out of it.  You literally gain nothing in the transaction while they gain everything. 

The funny thing is you're already paying these inflated prices to private hedge funds and other HFT operations.  You get to pay more for hyper-traded funds while getting nothing (except for the privilege of paying a little more, I guess).  All the details of the existing system look like a tax (since you can't elect not to pay it) except you get nothing out of it.  Like I said before in an exchange where 1 party seeks to gain all the utility of the transaction without providing any benefit/utility to the other party seems like a parasitical operation that should be discouraged. 

 

I lose .00005%.  Oh no, how horrible.  I'll much rather pay a 1% tax instead to keep these bastards from taking my .000005%.

Sounds to me that someone is getting utility, otherwise they wouldn't be engaging in trade.
19  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Arbitrage Opportunities between Mt. Gox & TradeHill? on: July 07, 2011, 07:03:02 PM
Add in the risk of the sites being hacked/going down, your trades not executing immediately and someone else swooping in before you and you only execute half your trade, etc...  For a few cents profit.
20  Economy / Economics / Re: Tobin Tax. Anyone want to help me build the Tobin Tax website? on: July 07, 2011, 05:00:25 PM
a 1% Tobin tax is extremely high.  Most Tobin tax proposals have been a fraction of that amount and would still have significant distortionary effects according to any of the positive studies done.  

I also do not see a problem with HFT or speculation on its own.

And why is this posted in Bitcoin Economics?

Most free-marketeers don't see are unable to see the incredible bias of all economists.  They believe that free markets are the solution to all our woes and that all economists (at least on their side) have no stake in the fight.  

Can I see some of those studies?  It's likely that I've seen them before and that they are totally wrong, well not 'wrong' just biased in favor of those who produce nothing and suck of the real economy (not referring to speculation in general, just HFT).  The resistance to a Tobin tax is not some benign triviality, it is through a lack of this tax that the system is largely gamed at present and there are people making an incredible pile of money in the process.

Let the people make a pile of money. Wealth is not limited unless you set it up that way from the start.  

So it's ok for people to make money off of other people without their knowledge or benefit at all?  And that somehow trading money back and forth with algorithms to exploit technicalities in an exchange system is creating "wealth"? 



People make money "off" people without their knowledge all the time.  Why is that wrong?  For example, my mortgage was sold to another company.  Someone else is making money off of me! Oh noes!  The benefit is liquidity.  No one is forcing people to sell at these prices, no one is given special access to make bids or asks.

Do you favor banning poker since some people might be better than others and "take money" from them?
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 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!