If he's gonna grow into a successful large real world business, then at the very least at some point he will start with a clean slate, transferring intellectual property to a new company that will not be beholden to a bunch of bitcoin "shareholders".
Along with everyone else, I'm hoping he delivers a dividend for gen 3. But do I expect that if asicminer really succeeds and starts to generate significant continuous revenue and expand into various other markets that the current shareholder arrangement will continue? Not a chance in hell.
Do you really think new investors would have faith and trust in FC after doing something like that? Investors whose investment contract had the full power of the Chinese government behind them enforcing said contract, as opposed to relying only on reputation on an internet forum as an enforcement mechanism? Yeah... I think they would go for it if they smelled profit potential. Well it wouldn't be a case of 'as opposed to' like there was a choice. If there was a choice and AM was listed sure everyone would buy the listed stock. Rather, it would become a case of, in your unlikely scenario, he stole everything from his previous shareholders so do you trust him enough to invest in him? We all know how much a contract is worth no matter what jurisdiction; and if he claimed to have lost the wallet or key, or was hacked, what's the 'full power' of any govt going to do anyway? |
|
|
|
If he's gonna grow into a successful large real world business, then at the very least at some point he will start with a clean slate, transferring intellectual property to a new company that will not be beholden to a bunch of bitcoin "shareholders".
Along with everyone else, I'm hoping he delivers a dividend for gen 3. But do I expect that if asicminer really succeeds and starts to generate significant continuous revenue and expand into various other markets that the current shareholder arrangement will continue? Not a chance in hell.
Do you really think new investors would have faith and trust in FC after doing something like that? |
|
|
|
anyone got the granny picture ready?  |
|
|
|
|
I like your site but the charts always look wrong to me. Would it be possible to change the chart's time period to 24h to match the "Volume (24h)" and "% Change (24h)"?
Additionally, it would be magic if you would enable a variety of user-switchable time periods? (24h, weekly, all time, etc.)
|
|
|
|
But why Canada or North Europe?
As well as lower electricity tariffs, there's also less sovereign risk. |
|
|
|
Well done that looks great, another step to mass adoption, congrats. Minor point: no comma separators? |
|
|
|
the thing is you and some others claim there is a majority vote for the name 'bit' while this simply is not true. The majority vote is for using µBTC rather than a full bitcoin.
'Bit' has already caught on as the most popular name. You're fighting a lost cause. |
|
|
|
you have no dividends.
I do. |
|
|
|
different from imaginary share dividends which never get realised. *coughs*
do you also lie to your wife |
|
|
|
|
The energy reqd to make the thick glass, deliver, install, maintain, and recycle, I don't think could ever be paid back with current pv tech.
|
|
|
|
All you Americans stop refusing to use the metric system.
Americans represent less than 5% of the world's population so I don't know why you keep singling them out. Also, their currency is metric: 100 cents = $1. |
|
|
|
I genuinely find it confusing. Bits to me are an indivisible unit of information storage.
Here, have a choc bit cookie. oops. edit: if a woman asks you 'do you fancy a bit?', do you reply, 'what, a 1 or a 0?' |
|
|
|
Why in the world use that one specific word that causes the most confusion out of all those possible words?
This confusion argument is silly. The mass adopters of the future, 2, 10, 20 years from now, perhaps 100's of millions of people who will have never heard of eg a microbitcoin, compared to ... well truly I have yet to see a genuine example of where a reasonably intelligent person would get confused by 'bits', and I've seen lot's of contrived and very unconvincing examples, but if there is someone who actually finds it confusing I feel sincerely sorry for them. |
|
|
|
If a "bit" is one of something, why is there 100 smaller parts in each one?
For stronger correlation to peoples mental model of what a currency is, eg $'s and cents. It 'maps' better to the way they think. That makes it far easier to understand, and consequently to want, and to use. |
|
|
|
I was opposed to "bits" first, but changed my mind. The icing on the cake was when I heard gavin say the block reward was "25 thousand millibitcoins" in a recent panel discussion. "25 million bits" is so much better and as many here point out: future-proof. Agreed. "25 million bits" is so much better than "25 thousand millibitcoins". Another icing on the cake example, the recent Glen Beck interview where Elizabeth Ploshay sent iirc "point zero zero two" bitcoin to Jeffery Tucker as a demo, I think she was embarrassed just saying it, and there was some comment about how small an amount it seemed/sounded. (sorry video is down atm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eADNt9lfaDU) |
|
|
|
I'm increasingly seeing people use the "bit" unit, how much is 1 bit? I've never seen this unit explained.
There's been quite a lot of threads on this, both here eg this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=592691.0 and at r/bitcoin. The main aim of this proposal is for bitcoin amounts to be more readily cognizable to (possibly) millions of new adopters over the coming years. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
