|
I'll guess after tomorrow.
|
|
|
|
|
Bought lots of Steam games, privateinternetaccess, and some computer hardware. Total has been a little less than $1000.
|
|
|
|
Love this period of "wtf have we just done, everyone wait a second" as trading completely pauses after breaking important barriers
now we are breaking down walls to /\700!!!*jmho*  It'll be interesting to watch what happens now. In the past, it hasn't taken long for the ask depth to fill back in. Maybe people are taking their coins out of gox. Who knows. It's also going to be interesting to see if/how tomorrow's senate hearing influences the market. |
|
|
|
This thread is stupid, this board is stupid, Bitcoin is stupid.
Let's go |
|
|
|
This topic cannot be true because my dad already is satoshi nakamoto
Son!? |
|
|
|
Continue to fight to keep bitcoin from being corrupted....if it actually happens.
No need to fork bitcoin, as you can buy/use/support a viable fork in litecoin.
Does litecoin still use a distributed blockchain? If so, I am going to create a businesses that blacklists/whitelists coins and addresses in litecoin's blockchain. |
|
|
|
It is now time to fork bitcoin. There is no reason to have only one.
With new efforts to integrate user identities - there is now a very big divide between two competing schools of thought. Each can go down their respective paths without interfering with the progress of the others. The one thing necessary for this to occur - exists wonderfully.
To create Bitcoin1 and Bitcoin2, we'd need to divide the processing power. Fortunately, we presently have more than twice the processing power that is necessary. The network is a perfect capacity for being split.
Bitcoin1 can go on with the anarchists/outlaws who hate all government involvement and despises law and order. Bitcoin2 can intergrate things which improve decent use in an orderly society.
Time to Fork Bitcoin.
Ok. Does Bitcoin1 still use a distributed blockchain? If so, I am going to create a businesses that blacklists/whitelists coins and addresses in Bitcoin1's blockchain. |
|
|
|
wow - falling fast on Stamp. Not sure if I want to catch this knife...  . It is very sharp but it keeps bouncing back every time it falls. I expect that only bad news will cause a real crash. I don't know what that could be other than regulations.. I have not seen that much buying power the last few days. Who dares to buy? I did. I wanted to buy something with bitcoin. So I bought some more and spent them. |
|
|
|
I'm probably going to be off Monday, and I'm toying with the idea of taking a trip to DC for the hearing. Anyone else going? |
|
|
|
So far what I'm reading is a very adult conversation about serious issues Bitcoin faces as it grows up. I'm not seeing the sort of thread that would happen here or Reddit.
It's not decisions being forced by the Foundation and I'm tired of seeing it put across like that. It's a discussion and it's a really important one.
This. The level of freak-out going on around here is extraordinary. |
|
|
|
What's to stop the same thing happening if the ALT-COIN you've switched to becomes the de-facto ?
The government will just go after that one.
There is, in my mind, ONLY ONE SOLUTION..
The PROTOCOL.. The thing that utterly defines the coin, CANNOT CHANGE. (You can change the client and update code etc etc.. but NOT THE UNDERLYING PROTOCOL)
I don't understand how people are overlooking this. Redlisting, cointracking, address monitoring, whitelisting, blacklisting, and any other term you can think of for tracking data in the blockchain does not require any change to the bitcoin protocol. Anyone can do. You can do. I can do it. If a group of people want to setup a business that tracks coins and white/blacklists addresses/coins, they can do it...right now...exactly as the protocol exists today. It could have been done from day 1 of bitcoin's existence. This is possible with all distributed blockchain based cryptocurrencies. |
|
|
|
Just watched that wall on Stamp get gobbled up. Pretty incredible.
450 new "bottom" LOL Who knows. But that burst of buying was pretty intense. |
|
|
|
|
Just watched that wall on Stamp get gobbled up. Pretty incredible.
|
|
|
|
Does anyone actually posses enough btc to purchase real esate though?
Ummmmmmmmmmm... |
|
|
|
Do you think BTC will ever cost a millon dollars?
When?
Here's what I think. Is is possible? Yes. Is it likely? No. If it's likely, then when? 2050 Hope that helps. |
|
|
|
"Bitcoin is a decentralized electronic currency" Hahahahahahahahahahahaha XD True. |
|
|
|
|
I voted stay. I think this is being blown out of proportion and what he's proposing is practically impossible to prevent anyway.
|
|
|
|
If the foundation chooses to support this idea, it will be the day when Bitcoin splits. In one way or another, there will be two different Bitcoin protocols, be it in the form of an altcoin or as a hard fork. I hope they make the right decision, which is obvious in my mind.
mikes idea is not acceptable of course. it will be interesting so see, what the devs of Litecoin will do... What can they do? There's not much anyone can do about things like this. As Carlton has already pointed out, this isn't a protocol change. Tracking coins and creating whitelists/blacklists/redlists/bluelists is possible and open for anyone to do due to bitcoin's (and all other cryptocoins) design. Its different. If a average joe creates such a list on its server it doesnt matter. But if the bitcoin foundation changes the official wallet and shows tainted coins it will have a bad effect. It doesn't matter who creates the list. If the list is trusted by enough people, and governments mandate that businesses register or only accept from "verified" bitcoins on some approved list, then you get the same thing. Again, it doesn't matter if everyone's complaining prevents the Foundation from implementing something like this, because there's really nothing that can be done to prevent somebody from doing it and from governments from legislating for it. |
|
|
|
Here's my question: What choice do we have?
If the government decides they want businesses to report what Bitcoin addresses they are using (say, on a new virtual currencies tax form), and who has sent them money and who they have sent money to, it will effectively de-anonymize the whole network. Businesses couldn't operate legitimately without compliance, and businesses who complied would effectively rat out all of those who didn't.
If the government decides to implement it, it wouldn't be hard to get enough businesses onboard to make it eventually fully effective.
I agree this would effectively kill Bitcoin - no one wants every financial transaction they make to be aired to the public. Basically, the government is in control of Bitcoin's future.
I think coin/address tracking is inevitable. It's the best way for governments to gain some control over bitcoin (I'm not saying it's a good thing). But here's what I think about it. I think if governments are going to mandate that coins/addresses be tracked and attached to real-world identities, then the government should accept responsibility for when (not if) that data is leaked/stolen from the centralized servers that store it. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
