 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »
|
|
To people who ask about screenshots or videos. Dont be lazy. He has a VMware link you can try it yourself. It shouldnt take long for you to set it up, try it out and post some screenies yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
Also if you have 25 BTC this is a good way to earn 12.5 btc... Pour 25 btc in. People will think there is plenty of money and pour in their own 1 btc amounts... But they are just paying you in reality. There is going to be enough suckers thinking there is plenty money in, you will have your 12.5 BTC before it collapses
Also how many payments can there be in a single transaction on the blockchain? I imagine the system might have trouble if it suddenly have to pay to 100 different adresses every hour?
|
|
|
|
|
What happens if you deposit less than the minimum amount?
|
|
|
|
...Since it's trustless the only thing you can compete on is fee, and so it's a race to the bottom. The fee would have to end up at zero. See also: dice sites, exchanges, and anything else currently taking a fee for a service that can be decentralised and made trust-less.  Hi doog, much respect to you for making just-dice and all the work you do on this forum regarding scammers etc. I just wanted to chime in and say fee is not the only thing provably fair ponzis can compete on. It can be the mechanisms themselves. For example how often payout? How much. Will there be levels for each investor, can you pay more for a bigger return etc.. There are many things to compete on, the idea is to make it fun and rewarding, and this is just the beginning. |
|
|
|
|
This is great work. The orphans of GHash.IO could be explained by the DDoS attack they were experiencing.
|
|
|
|
|
This is a load of bullshit. The regulators dont respond to anything but powerful people. And the established financial industry is way more powerful than some measly bitcoiners. All you are doing is giving credibility to an institution that has done nothing but stifle innovation, and rack up costs when it comes to the financial market. They couldnt predict the housing bubble, they couldnt stop bernie madoff, they gave trillions of dollars to institutions doing shady buisnesses. Credit Default Swaps. Very shady stuff. Now some people apparantly want to mingle with these guys. What the fuck, they are nothing but bad news. It might not seem like it, but they will work tirelessly to restrict bitcoins ability to compete with the dollar regardless of a little q & a with some bitcoiners
|
|
|
|
|
The only freedom is freedom from illusion. Or rather, the people of thailand dont stand much chance against laws like these, as long as they remain uninformed or misinformed. In the west, we are more informed, so the government cant get away with random things like this. So thats the difference between uninformed people, and more or less well-informed people, its what their government gets away with.
|
|
|
|
|
are you basing this on a graph?
|
|
|
|
|
Why isnt there a "i support another denomination" option
|
|
|
|
Mike,
I read your post four times and I still am not sure what you are trying to say. Are you upset that the Bitcoin Foundation doesn't do what you want or are you upset that Gavin Andresen gets a salary, or are you upset that the Bitcoin Foundation is hiring a lobbyist to go to Washington? Or is the choice of lobbyist or lawyer that is bothering you?
From what you wrote, it is not clear to me what it is you are complaining about and what you really want.
The idea of calling out to the Bitcoin Foundation on this site Bitcointalk to disband actually goes against the principles of Bitcoin. Instead of trying to tell other people what to do, why don't you just organize your own Foundation / Organization / Association and promulgate your own ideas. The Bitcoin Foundation is not going to go away just because you are unhappy with them.
I hear that the Bitcoin Foundation has there own private secret forum on which only members can post, and which only members can read. If you really object to something they are doing, and if, as some people here say, you have lifetime membership, Why don't you just post what you have to say on their forum?
Your complaints seem disorganized and displaced.
I do welcome any new foundation you organize. Organize a new and better foundation does not require or mandate any existing organization to disband.
Let us address the issue of hiring a lawyer and a lobbyist.
Those of you in this thread who would like to just rebel and protest against the government and say that we should just use bitcoin until fiat falls into decline and the government comes to us, well, high school is over and the reality is, as we have learned from Bitfloor and Mt.Gox-Dwolla, that the rest of the universe runs on rules and widespread adoption of bitcoin will require smart navigation of various legal systems. The best way to deal with government objections is to engage the government directly. I for one and happy that the Bitcoin Foundation is hiring a lawyer and lobbyist.
I do want to point out that your goals and motivations, as you wrote in your posting here are not quite clear and I look forward to learning more about the new association you plan on organizing.
Lorenzo Money
You know the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Whats going to happen is this lobbyist is going to washington, then hes going to meet all kinds of people who will begin wondering how they can profit from legislating bitcoin. Thats just how things go. In the end, you will have very strict and specific regulation pointed at bitcoin, which makes bitcoin startups nearly impossible. The result is a few big players will control the market - people of the bitcoin foundation - and the few exchanges availaible will have massive fees, stupid delays, and will be reporting everything you do to the government. However it will just be a temporary thing as the US government is about to go bankrupt. Thats why its pointless to begin with, to interact with it, or lobby it. Bitcoin is going to outlast it anyway, the regulation wont matter in 4-5 years when the US is litterately collapsing. |
|
|
|
|
Centralization is not bad if its voluntary
|
|
|
|
|
hi.
is the hardware encryption on the samsung 840 series SSD's worth anything? Do anyone know if its broken or a workaround/hack have been found?
Thanks in advance
|
|
|
|
|
its just bad practice giving your phone access to your main hoard of bitcoin. blockchain.info wallet stores password in plaintext afaik. its not a problem because the app is sandboxed so no other apps should have access to it (unless the phone is rooted or modded). however the phone is just another way for a keylogger or malware. its a potential backdoor if you give it acces to your main hoard.
|
|
|
|
|
if you are using their phone app dont. it makes you vulnerable. especially if you have a rooted/modded phone.
|
|
|
|
1 BTC should be = 100.000.000 Bitcoin. What i mean by this, is we should start calling the smallest amount of bitcoin BITCOIN. Comparatively we dont call an atomic unit of gold, schwarzeniggel, we call it gold. No matter what quantity it is. However, if we have more gold, we denominate it in Kilos or whatever depending on which area of the world you are in. Gold is a material, not a unit of measure, just like water or oil or sand. You can't say that you have "2 golds of rice" or that you weigh "150 golds" or even "5 golds of gold". You measure gold, silver, etc in grams or ounces (or pounds or tons for much larger amounts). Likewise, a Bitcoin is a well-establish unit of measure of money. It is equal to 10^8 satoshis, where a satoshi is the smallest "atomic" unit of measure of the Bitcoin measurement system. You can have 5 Bitcoins of money, for example, but you cannot have 5 golds of money. So are we gonna have wallets displaying how many atomic amounts of bitcoin we have? YES, it is simple without being misleading. One problem arises tho, because even the poorest bitcoin owners will have millions of "atomic" bitcoin atm. So we need to start denominating it, just like we denominate gold.. It will be misleading, IMO. How many Bitcoins do you have? Is that in the "old" or "new" Bitcoin unit of measure? Imagine that someone tried to redefine the meter to be what is currently a millimeter because small units like centimeter and millimeter are too "confusing" for idiots. Then a new kilometer will be the same as one old meter. How far do you have to drive to work? 5000 kilometers? Wow, that's a long drive! That'll take you days of driving! Oh, you mean "new kilometer", not "old kilometer". That should be a 5-10 minute drive. The new denominations could probably draw inspiration from the filesystem. The file system automatically cleans up the number when its displaying file sizes. This is the kilobyte, megabyte, gigabyte system its quite easy to understand. No filesystem I have ever used nor heard about does this (and I'm familiar with the filesystems on quite a few different operating systems spanning decades). Software like file browsers and directory listers (such as the dir or ls commands) display file sizes in kilobytes etc, but the filesystem always store file sizes in bytes or blocks or records. What you're really suggesting is that everyone uses "new Bitcoin" (defined as the smallest atomic unit currently known as "satoshi") instead of using "old Bitcoin". You're also suggesting that this would somehow be less confusing to some imaginary users (frankly, I think you're the only user who is confused by this) than simply adopting other names like millibitcoin/bitmill/millie for the smaller Bitcoin denominations. you bore me |
|
|
|
|
if bitcoin cannot overcome the amount of decimal places, there is going to be another crypto to take its place
|
|
|
|
franky1 just beat me to it. For nearly forty years I've somehow managed to function in a dollar economy despite the fact I'm handling pennies, nickels, dimes, and quarters every single day. This satoshi naming issue is overblown. If people want to use it, they'll make an effort to figure it out. Of all the things in the Bitcoin universe, the decimal notation and naming is the least difficult to explain to a n00b.
If my wife can figure out the g/s/c conversion rate in World of Warcraft, she can figure out BTC when the time comes.
explaining it is one thing, remembering it, and using every day is another. its not practical Imagine if bitcoin was dollars for a second. 1 DTC = 100.000.000 Dollars This is fine untill the Dollars get enough value, then you need new denominations that have less Dollars in them. But instead of basing the new denominations on the previous one, base it on what it actually represents, which is an amount of dollars. I guess its harder to explain than i thought. But basically there are about 2.1 quadriallion atomic units of bitcoin, in which about half have been found. Bitcoins denominations should represent the amount of atomic units of bitcoin they repsresent, not which fraction of BTC they are because then we end up with a confusing chart. |
|
|
|
Gotta admit, pretty smart - Didn't see that coming, did we?
If you're a central bank, or a government feeling threatened by the rise of a paradigm such as bitcoin, how do you kill it?
Make it illegal? Make it difficult to use? Ostracize the theory's proponents?
Or just simply remove the underlying utility of the invention in question - in this case, bitcoin's use as either a transactional currency, or a useful store of value.
Other than the speculators, who in their right mind would store their worth in something that has no steady, definite value?
Forget the people hurrying to buy bitcoin today (because tomorrow it'll be 25% more!) - Who would dare use bitcoin to purchase a good or service from someone in another country, or at a retail counter?
If you're a central bank, or a government, with massive resources at your disposal, you don't care if you make a few people wealthy in the beginning (or destroy a few fortunes in the end) you've accomplished what you set out to do: "Bitcoin? That was a crazy ride. Who'd ever trust that thing again?"
It's a shame, really - there was so much potential, and yet it's proven so easy to destroy.
The destruction was just not conducted the way that any of us thought it would be done.
the government couldnt even prevent us from buying and selling drugs, or alchohol for that matter. the government is not really as powerful as people think it is. if there is sufficient demand, the thing will exist. doesent matter wether its bitcoin, cannabis or whatever... so GOOD LUCK GOVERNMENT if you want to fight bitcoin |
|
|
|
a decimal of a dollar is not called a dollar.. it is called a cent
the decimal of a UK Pound is not called a pound its called a penny.
the decimal of a bitcoin is a bitcent. the decimal of that can be bitmills. the decimal of that can be microbitcoins. the decimals of that can be called satoshi's
this is alot easier then calling
0.01 a bitcoin
0.0001 a bitcoin
0.000001 a bitcoin
0.00000001 a bitcoin
so as alot of people that have been around for atleast a year call it this.
this is alot easier then calling
0.01 a bitcent
0.0001 a bitmill
0.000001 a microbitcoin
0.00000001 a satoshi
1 BTC is in fact 100.000.000 atomic units of bitcoin. And i prefer to stick that way. It is a more intitutive way of denominating bitcoin, by calling the smallest atomic amount of it for bitcoin and then having wallets display how many atomic amounts of bitcoin you have. Of course shortening the numbers to make it easier to quickly understand and relate to. Shortening the numbers like the filesizes. ~1000 Bytes = 1Kilobyte ~1000Kilobyte = 1Megabyte in bitcoins case that is 1000 atomic bitcoins = 1Kilobitcoin 1000 Kilobitcoin = 1Megabitcoin So if you have 10 BTC atm. that is the same as 1000 Megabitcoin or 1 Gigabitcoin |
|
|
|
the smallest atomic amount of bitcoin should be called bitcoin and not satoshi because it would change everything.
It should be? Says who? And what would it change? You say people can't handle milli- and micro- and the solution that you come up with is that they should use Kilo- and Mega- instead. What's the difference? That's not gonna change everything, it's the same thing turned upside-down. omfg. did you read the rest of the post or just stop at that one sentence? i think i put some pretty good reasons why |
|
|
|
|
